EJTR 24 - Full Text

4
ISSN (PRINT): 1994 - 7658

ISSN (ONLINE): 1314 - 0817
4
European
Journal
of Tourism
Research
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Elka Dogramadjieva, Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski",
Stanislav Ivanov, Varna University of Management, Bulgaria Sofia, Bulgaria
Evangelos Christou, Alexander Technological Institute of
Thessaloniki, Greece
ASSOCIATE EDITORS: Harry Timmermans, Eindhoven University of Technology,
Basak Denizci, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Netherlands
Kong, P. R. C. Harald Pechlaner, Catholic University, Eichstätt-Ingolstadt,
Giacomo Del Chiappa, University of Sassari, Italy Germany
Martina G. Gallarza, University of Valencia, Spain Haywantee Ramkissoon, Curtin University, Australia
Miroslava Dimitrova, Varna University of Management, Jamie Murphy, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu,
Bulgaria Finland
Jean Max Tavares, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas
Gerais, Brazil
ASSOCIATE EDITOR (DOCTORAL DISSERTATION SUMMARIES): John Williams, University of New Orleans, USA
Faizan Ali, University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee, Joshua Fu, University of Tennessee, USA
USA Juan Ignacio Pulido Fernández, University of Jaén, Spain
Judy Siguaw, East Carolina University, USA
Larry Dwyer, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
EDITORIAL ASSISTANT: Lina Anastassova, Bourgas Free University, Bulgaria
Maya Ivanova, Varna University of Management, Bulgaria Marianna Sigala, University of South Australia, Australia
Metin Kozak, Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey
Nicolas Peypoch, University of Perpignan, France
ADVISORY BOARD: Paola Paniccia, University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’, Italy
Arie Reichel, Ben Gurion University, Israel Paris Tsartas, University of the Aegean, Greece
Craig Webster, Ball State University, USA Preslav Dimitrov, South-West University “Neofit Rilski”,
Dimitrios Buhalis, Bournemouth University, U. K. Bulgaria
Ercan Sirakaya-Turk, University of South Carolina, USA Rachel Chen, University of Tennessee, USA
Muzaffer Uysal, University of Massachusetts – Amherst, USA Renata Tomljenovic, Institute for Tourism, Zagreb, Croatia
Philip Pearce, James Cook University, Australia Rob Law, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, P.
Stephen Wanhill, University of Limerick, Ireland R. C.
Roland Schegg, Institute of Economics & Tourism, Valais,
Switzerland
EDITORIAL BOARD: Roya Rahimi, University of Wolverhampton, U. K.
Alastair Morrison, Purdue University, USA Serdar Ongan, St. Mary's College of Maryland, USA
Astrid Kemperman, Eindhoven University of Technology, Seyhmus Baloglu, University of Nevada Las Vegas, USA
Netherlands Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis, Ball State University, USA
Brendan T. Chen, National Chin-Yi University of Tamara Ratz, Kodolányi János University College,
Technology, Taiwan Szekesfehervar, Hungary
Caroline Ritchie, Cardiff Metropolitan University, U.K. Tanja Mihalič, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Catriona Murphy, Limerick Institute of Technology, Ireland Ulrike Gretzel, University of Southern California –
Chris Choi, University of Guelph, Canada Annenberg, USA
Elitza Iordanova, University of West London, U. K. Yaniv Poria, Ben Gurion University, Israel
CONTENT
Article number
EDITORIAL
The first chatbot of a tourism/hospitality journal: Editor’s impressions 2401

Stanislav Ivanov
RESEARCH PAPERS
Individual Perceptions of the Value of Leisure: The Influence of the Social 2402
Democratic Welfare State and Leftist Values Systems
Craig Webster, Chih-Lun (Alan) Yen and Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis
Knowledge Sharing in Strategic Alliance Relationships: An Empirical Research on 2403

Hotels in Turkey
Nilüfer Vatansever Toylan, Fatih Semerciöz and Masood-Ul-Hassan
An exploratory and qualitative study on the meaning of transformative tourism 2404

and its facilitators and inhibitors
Jessica Mei Pung and Giacomo Del Chiappa
Investigation of the Motivations and Experiences of Tourists Visiting the Gallipoli 2405
Peninsula as a Dark Tourism Destination
Kadir Çakar
Tourism competitiveness and the well-being of residents: a debate on registered 2406

and non-registered accommodation establishments
José Francisco Perles-Ribes, Ana Belén Ramón-Rodríguez,
Luis Moreno-Izquierdo and María Jesús Such-Devesa
Literary tourism as a field of research over the period 1997-2016 2407

Samet Çevik
Volunteer Tourism: Motivations of Thai Tourists and Western Tourists 2408

Raweewan Proyrungroj
#10yearschallenge: how co-creation permeated tourism research. 2409

A bibliometric analysis
Marco Tregua, Anna D’Auria and Harry Costin
Price determinants of Airbnb listing prices in Lake Balaton Touristic Region, 2410
Hungary
Gábor Dudás, Tamás Kovalcsik, György Vida, Lajos Boros and Gyula Nagy
An extended model of destination image formation: The inclusion of sensory 2411

images
Bình Nghiêm-Phú and Awangku Hassanal Bahar Pengiran Bagul
RESEARCH NOTES
The joy of riding or walk of shame? The theme park experience of obese people 2412
Yaniv Poria, Jeremy Beal and Arie Reichel
DOCTORAL DISSERTATION SUMMARIES
Relational dynamics of high-level gastronomy in tourism 2413

Natalia Daries Ramón
The first chatbot of a tourism/hospitality journal:
Editor’s impressions
Stanislav Ivanov 1*
1 Professor and Vice Rector (Research), Varna University of Management, 13A Oborishte str., 9000 Varna,
Bulgaria. Editor-in-chief, European Journal of Tourism Research. Tel: +359 52 300 680. Web:
http://www.stanislavivanov.com; E-mail: stanislav.ivanov@vumk.eu
* Corresponding author
Abstract
The first chatbot of an academic journal in the field of tourism and hospitality was launched in 2017. This
editorial presents the structure of the chatbot of the European Journal of Tourism Research, reflects on Editor’s
experience in developing and using the chatbot, and provides practical recommendations to editors and
publishers who may wish to adopt chatbots for social media communications.
Keywords: chatbot, social media, communications with authors, academic journal
Citation: Ivanov, S. (2020). The first chatbot of a tourism/hospitality journal: Editor’s impressions. European
Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2401
© 2020 The Authors

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). To
view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
EDITORIAL 1
The first chatbot of a tourism/hospitality journal: Editor’s impressions
Introduction
The Facebook page of the European Journal of Tourism Research (EJTR)
(https://www.facebook.com/EuroJTR/) went live on 5th January 2011. It was created as a tool to
communicate with the board members, authors, readers and reviewers in social media (Ivanov, 2018).
My experience during the first 6 years (2011-2017) of its existence showed that many of the questions
received through the page were similar and related to a very few issues: Is the journal indexed in
Scopus/Web of Science? Does it have an Impact Factor? How to submit a paper? How to become a
reviewer? How to access the papers? How much does it cost to publish? etc., but I was not always able
to respond in a timely manner. Hence, the communication process was ripe for automation. On 24 th
August 2017, the journal’s chatbot was introduced as an instrument to increase the speed,
effectiveness and efficiency in the provision of information about the journal through its Facebook
page. At that time, it was the first chatbot of an academic journal in tourism/hospitality and probably
one of the very first chatbots of an academic journal globally. In this editorial I present the structure
of the chatbot, reflect on my experience in developing and using the chatbot for social media
communications, and provide practical recommendations to editors and publishers who wish to adopt
chatbots as well.
Architecture
The chatbot is created using the chatbot platform Chatfuel (https://chatfuel.com/). There are many
platforms on the market. I chose that platform for two main reasons. First, it has a convenient and
easy to use interface that allows a person without knowledge and skills in software engineering
(someone like me) to develop a chatbot. Second, the platform’s free version has functionalities that
are sufficient for a basic chatbot for the provision of information. The architecture of the bot includes
3 elements: blocks, links between blocks, and AI rules.
Blocks
The chatbot consists of 20 blocks related to various aspects the journal – from publisher and editorial
board, through types of papers, review process, and referencing, to plagiarism, indexing, and
publication charges. Figure 1 provides a screenshot of some of the blocks from the administrative
panel of the chatbot. Most of the blocks are informative and provide answers to questions (e.g.
Indexing, Published papers, Editorial board), while the aim of other blocks is to make the
communication between the user and the chatbot smoother and more pleasant (e.g. Welcome, Thank
you, Good bye!). A separate block allows users to opt-in to receive messages from the chatbot. There is
no limit to the number of blocks and new ones can be added when needed. The content of three
sample blocks is presented in Figure 2.
Links
Each informative block provides links to other relevant blocks or the website of the journal in order to
facilitate the navigation of the user through the chatbot’s blocks (see Figure 2). In that way, the users
could receive information about related topics or they are transferred to the website of the journal
(http://ejtr.vumk.eu/). Most of the informative blocks include a ‘call for action’ button – Submissions.
It should be noted that the number of links one block may have to other blocks or to other websites is
limited (in the case of the EJTR’s chatbot these are 3 links), hence the links than need to appear with
each block have to be chosen very carefully.
2
Ivanov (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2401
Figure 1. Chatbot blocks
Figure 2. Content of sample blocks
3
AI rules
The AI rules indicate the key words that trigger response by the chatbot. The response can be either
activating a particular block or a free text response. Figure 3 provides a screenshot with some sample
AI rules used by the chatbot of the EJTR. Besides the key words, the AI rules includes indicative
sentences that show the context in which the word could be used. The initial rules created during the
development of the chatbot were expanded and enriched with new trigger words and sentences, based
on the actual communication between the chatbot and the users. Different spelling (British and
American), synonyms, abbreviations, and typos were considered for some key words.
Figure 3. Sample AI rules
4
Ivanov (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2401
Impact
Since the launch of the chatbot in 2017, 56 users have communicated with the chatbot. In most cases
the communication was smooth, the chatbot recognised what the users were looking for and
responded in a proper way, especially when the users were utilising the buttons of the blocks. That
was not the case, however, when the users were typing free text questions. As the chatbot has limited
functionalities dictated by its intended application (providing answers to frequently asked questions
about an academic journal), the questions that fell outside the scope of its blocks and AI rules
remained unanswered, which caused some user frustration. In such situations I interfered and
responded to the query. Furthermore, the chatbot’s default language is English; hence it does not
recognise words written in other languages. All in all, each conversation provided valuable feedback
on how to improve the chatbot through new blocks, new links between them, new AI rules or
enriching the existing rules with more trigger words and exemplary sentences. Furthermore, the
chatbot definitely saved time in responding to queries and did this in a timely manner. The
development and the maintenance of the chatbot took about 6 man-hours so far, while responding to
the queries would have taken much more time.
From a marketing perspective, my impression is that the chatbot contributed positively to the
submissions in the EJTR. The internal records of the journal show that 7 manuscripts were submitted
by the users within a couple of months after they had communicated with the chatbot. Unfortunately,
I cannot determine whether they had decided to submit to the journal before or after they had
communicated with the chatbot.
Conclusions, insights and recommendations

The chatbot is a tool that facilitates the provision of answers to (frequently asked) questions and
stimulates user action. It should not replace human-human interaction but support it. A chatbot
should not be created to shield the editor from communicating with the authors, but as a tool to
provide faster response when the editor cannot do this. In addition, the editor needs to be in control
of the communication between the chatbot and the users. Based on my personal experience in
developing and using the EJTR’s chatbot, I can provide the following recommendations to journal
editors and publishers who wish to adopt chatbots for social media communications:
 Formulate the proper goal you want to achieve with the chatbot – provision of information about
the journal, stimulating submissions, maintaining relationships with the page fans/chatbot users. The
goal will determine the chatbot’s blocks and functionalities.
 Inform the users that they communicate with a chatbot to suppress potential users’ expectations
about human-level interaction with the bot.
 Develop blocks that provide relevant and sufficient information about the journal – publisher,
frequency of publication, editorial board, special issues, submission guidelines, etc.
 One block needs to refer to one issue/action only – i.e. providing information about how to submit
a paper or about the indexing of the journal, not both. This provides greater flexibility when
developing the AI rules and in responding to users’ queries.
 Provide useful and relevant links between the blocks – i.e. the Submission Guidelines block needs
to include a button with a link to the referencing style as well.
 Update the blocks, links between the blocks, and the AI rules on the basis of the actual chatbot-
user interactions.
 Keep the information provided by the chatbot up-to-date – e.g. about special issues submission
due dates.
 Direct the user to journal’s online submission system to stimulate submissions.
5
 Direct the user to the journal’s website to stimulate readership.

 Re-engage with the users that already interacted with the chatbot, by sending automated messages
– e.g. news about the journal, new special issue, approaching submission due dates, or holiday
greetings.
 Keep the human in the loop – the chatbot should not be left alone in the communications with the
users. The human should interfere when the chatbot provides irrelevant answers to users’ queries.
My personal view is that a basic chatbot that provides information and redirects to the journal’s
submission system and website is more than sufficient for a single journal. There is no need to invest
resources (time and money) in developing a very comprehensive chatbot for an individual journal.
That is not case, however, when we talk about publishers – their chatbots need to be much more
elaborate.
Finally, we should not forget that a chatbot, regardless of how sophisticated it is, as any other piece of
technology, is just a tool, not a goal. It is the human-to-human communications and relationships
that are important. If a chatbot enhances them – it does a good job. Otherwise – it needs to be fired.
References
Ivanov, S. (2018). The European Journal of Tourism Research: A Personal Journey. European Journal of
Tourism Research 18, pp. 5-12.
Received: 26/12/2019
Accepted: 26/12/2019
6
Individual Perceptions of the Value of Leisure: The Influence of
the Social Democratic Welfare State and Leftist Values Systems
Craig Webster 1*, Chih-Lun (Alan) Yen 2 and Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis 3
1 Ball State University, USA. Department of Management, Whitinger Business Building, room 205, 2000 W.
University Ave., Muncie, IN 47306. Phone: 765-285-90220. E-mail: cwebster3@bsu.edu
2 Ball State University, USA. Department of Management. E-mail: cyen@bsu.edu
3 Ball State University, USA. Department of Management. E-mail: shjiavgousti@bsu.edu
Abstract
In this work, the authors intend to show that a population’s experience with Marxist governance and an
individual’s political ideology conditions individual perceptions of the value of leisure. The authors look into the
cross-national variations of the perception of the value that individuals place on leisure, using a database with
over 84,000 observations from the World Values Survey from 2010-2014. The authors postulate that Marxist
leisure values that have permeated societies either via social democratic welfare states or a socialist welfare state
experience create expectations for leisure and that the individual’s self-identification on a left/right political
spectrum plays a role in influencing perceptions of the importance of leisure. Several individual-level indicators
are used, to ensure that individual-level explanations are taken into account. The authors show that placing value
upon leisure is influenced by social democratic regimes and a person’s political ideology on a left/right
continuum.
Keywords: social democracy, liberalism, leisure, public opinion, Marxism
Citation: Webster, C., Yen, C.-L. & Hji-Avgoustis, S. (2020). Individual Perceptions of the Value of Leisure: The
Influence of the Social Democratic Welfare State and Leftist Values Systems. European Journal of Tourism
Research 24, 2402
© 2020 The Author(s)

RESEARCH PAPER 1
Individual Perceptions of the Value of Leisure: The Influence of the Social Democratic Welfare State and Leftist Values Systems
Introduction
There are many things that impact upon perceptions of leisure, such as culture, demographics, and
attitudes and there is a large and growing literature that has dealt with perceptions of leisure and the
ethics of leisure (see, for example; Fennell 2006; Lovelock & Lovelock, 2013). While a great deal is
known about attitudes towards leisure within countries (see, for example, Cyba, 1992; Lee & Tideswell,
2005; Rahkonen et al., 2016) and while much has been researched regarding ethical issues and leisure
(see, for example, Sylvester, 2008; Sylvester, 1987), there is a need to understand how the political
environment and political attitudes impact upon perceptions of leisure. Since political attitudes are
something that informs a worldview and impacts upon a person’s ethical compass, we look into how
the political environment and general political attitudes impact upon how individuals perceive the
importance of leisure in their lives.
There is reason to believe that political attitudes and ideologies have an impact upon attitudes
towards leisure and tourism. For this work, we use Veal’s (2010) definition of an ideology being a set of
internally consistent ideas about how society should be run. In modern societies, there are a number
of ideologies that compete against each other. Two leading textbooks in comparative politics (O’Neil,
2012; Draper & Ramsay, 2012) isolate a few ideologies that are available. O’Neil (2012) describes the
major ideologies as communism, social democracy, liberalism, fascism, and anarchism. Draper and
Ramsay (2012) only mention social democracy, “extreme market democracy,” Christian democracy,
and communism. Finding a middle ground in which the world is not oversimplified in terms of
ideologies nor too complicated, is no easy task for the authors of textbooks on ideology and some
authors take a much more complex view of the panoply of political ideologies.
More sophisticated discussions on political ideologies discuss far more possibilities (see, for example;
Macris, 1986; Schumaker et al., 1997; Sargent, 1996; Vincent, 2009). While these authors generally
divide the major ideologies into a few short categories (conservatism, liberalism, anarchism, Marxism,
fascism/national socialism, and environmentalism), they do not deal with the categories in a uniform
way. For example, Schumaker (1997) differentiates between “traditional” and “contemporary”
conservatism. In a similar fashion, these key authors make distinctions between forms of liberalism
and Marxism. What is also noteworthy is that these authors engage with other types of ideologies that
do not fit into the neat categories offered by the introductory texts of comparative politics (O’Neil,
2012; Draper & Ramsay, 2012). These other ideologies include feminism, fundamentalism, nationalism,
“Third World ideologies,” liberation theology, and Islam (Schumaker et al., 1997; Sargent, 1996). This
variety of approaches is echoed in the tourism literature (Veal, 2010). Some of these ideologies are
fairly modern, since some of them (such as feminism and Islam) suggest complex systems for
understanding social and economic reality and give a great deal of guidance with regards to political
solutions to social and economic problems. While there are other political considerations that can be
mentioned, such as authoritarianism and totalitarianism, these are not political philosophies. Rather,
they are non-democratic tendencies and approaches to the use of power relative to a population. As
such, they are outside the scope of this analysis, which focusses specifically on political ideologies.
The literature on ideologies highlights that there are several forms of organized ways of thinking that
have prevailed, some of them Marxist in origin. The two major ways of conceptualizing Marxism are
the revolutionary/Leninist form and the evolutionary/social democratic form. These two forms of
Marxism evolved in the beginning of the 20th century over the very pragmatic and ideological
argument regarding how socialism was to be achieved. While social democrats are Marxists, they
believe in an evolutionary movement within market economies bringing in the socialist phase of
history. This is something that Communists reject, as they contend that the bourgeoisie’s political
2
Webster et al. (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2402
system will prevent any meaningful strides towards socialism. While many contemporary social
democrats in Europe may not identify the roots of their way of thinking, the historical development of
their political parties and political history reveals that their political parties and ideologies are
descendants of 19th century Marxism.
Historically, there was a massive disagreement within the Marxist parties in Europe regarding how to
achieve socialism. The major ideological rift resulted in the split in Germany’s Social Democratic party
that came to a head during World War One, resulting in a group of Marxists forming the USPD
(Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany) in reaction to the SPD’s complicity with the
Kaiser’s request for funding for the war effort. The USPD eventually developed into the KPD
(Communist Party of Germany). A similar split occurred among the Marxists in Russia, leading to the
now familiar language of Bolsheviks (a faction that developed into the Communist Party) and the
Mensheviks (a social democratic faction that originally ran the government of Russia following the
abdication of the Russian Czar).
While both of these factions of Marxism have battled each other fiercely (sometimes ideologically and
sometimes in a literal sense), they have commonalities in that both claim to be the political voice of
the working class. Since they are both based upon working class foundations, they have a similar class
bias and many similarities in terms of the policies they follow and desire. One of those policies deals
with attitudes towards sports, leisure, and tourism.
Proponents of both of these forms of Marxism have very similar attitudes towards leisure (Veal, 2010),
with both championing public provision of leisure and extolling leisure as an entitlement of all people.
Both of these ideological variants of Marxism view the divisions of humans in societies as something
based upon economic relationships that have created two classes. The liberation of the working class
is therefore done, in part, by creating entitlements to leisure. Indeed, what is a noteworthy feature of
any country that has a strong Marxist past is the existence of large public leisure amenities. In those
countries with powerful social democratic and Communist parties, one often finds large parks and
other recreation facilities. Whether in social democratic Scandinavia or the Soviet Union and its
satellite states, large parks, leisure facilities, and sporting facilities made available either for free usage
or at nominal fees were, or still are, the norm. In opposition to these Marxist approaches to leisure,
liberal and conservative approaches typically stress that leisure is something the private sector should
provide (Veal, 2010) and that it is not an entitlement to all. While many public amenities exist in more
liberal societies, the prevalence of public facilities available to the general public at little or no cost are
more commonplace in social democratic and Communist regimes.
Since political ideologies are embedded in political parties and political parties play a role in law-
making, political ideologies influenced political choices with regards to leisure. For example, Table 1
illustrates that there is a significant variation in terms of the hours that people work in some selected
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. A casual look at the
data illustrates how many of the countries that work the fewest hours per worker are commonly
described as social democratic. For example, Norway, the Netherlands, and Denmark, countries
typically described as social democratic and that have had strong social democratic parties
dominating their governments since World War Two, work the fewest hours, apart from Germany.
These hours are based largely upon labor legislation and this is a major concern for social democratic
parties, as the political representatives of the working class.
3
Table 1: Total annual hours per worker (2017)

Country Total Annual Hours
per Worker
Mexico 2,257
South Korea 2,024
Greece 2,018
Poland 1,895
Lithuania 1,844
United States 1,780
OECD Countries 1,759
Hungary 1,740
Ireland 1,738
Canada 1,695
United Kingdom 1,681
Australia 1,676
Finland 1,628
Austria 1,613
Sweden 1,609
France 1,514
Netherlands 1,433
Norway 1,419
Denmark 1,408
Germany 1,356
Data source: OECD https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=ANHRS
While the data show that people in different countries work dissimilar numbers of hours per year,
they also suggest that labor legislation and the level of development play a role in how long people
work in countries. Because the amount of leisure that is available to citizens differs from country to
country and because the amount of leisure that is available is at least partly dependent upon political
choices (labor legislation), researchers need to learn more about how political influences play a role in
forming attitudes towards leisure. Here, we explore how Marxism, in its two prevailing forms, has
influenced values towards leisure as well as exploring how individual attitudes towards politics
influences attitudes towards leisure.
Literature Review
There is a great deal of literature looking into variations on perspectives about leisure. Some authors
have looked at the dissimilarities between countries from a purely theoretical perspective (Hollander,
1966; Zowisło, 2010) while others have looked upon the development of the field of leisure reviewing
how the field has perceived the question of the motivation of leisure (Chick, 1998; Chen & Pang, 2012).
A common approach to leisure values is a cultural one, positing that cultural attitudes influence
attitudes towards leisure. One vein in the literature looks upon changes in leisure values in Asian
economies and societies. There is an impressive amount written about leisure in China (see, for
example, Chick et al., 2008; Yan, 2013; Xiao, 1997), Korea (Lee & Kim, 2005), and Japan (Fuess, 2012;
Mitani, 2012). There are others authors who approach the impact of culture more broadly, focusing
upon international tourists and their leisure (Gursoy & Gavcar, 2003), or how religious and cultural
differences impact upon leisure practices (see for example, Engel-Yeger, 2012).
4
There has been some research that investigates leisure values and ethics, looking into cross-national
differences, generational differences, and gender differences in terms of perceptions of leisure. Craig
and Mullan (2013) deal with issues of gender and leisure in five countries. In their work, they find that
there are differences in leisure time for the populations in five countries (Australia, United States,
France, Italy, and Denmark), with Danish respondents having the most time for leisure in the five
countries studied. Gagliardi et al. (2007) focus upon older peoples’ leisure activities in several
countries (Germany, Finland, Hungary, the Netherlands, and Italy) to learn about how the elderly
spend their leisure time. There are some other noteworthy pieces that look at how approaches
towards leisure change over generations and how this is reflected in relationships and attitudes
toward leisure (Sicilia-Camacho et al., 2008; Tweng et al., 2010). These articles do not look at changes
and differences in terms of leisure attitudes between countries, but use survey techniques to learn
about how different generations view leisure within a country.
However, there are two noteworthy pieces of research that take a multilevel approach towards the
analysis of leisure (Wang & Wong, 2014; Verbakel 2013). Wang and Wong (2014) used data from the
2007 survey from the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) to analyse about 48,000 respondents
in 33 countries. Their research focusses upon the impact that leisure has upon happiness in 33
countries, finding that the quality and quantity of leisure play a role in conditioning happiness. What
is interesting about this research is that it uses a multilevel approach, looking at how individual
attributes (demographics and attitudes) and characteristics (GDP, unemployment rate, and political
stability) of the countries in which the individual lives may play a role in terms of conditioning a
person’s subjective measure of happiness.
A much more relevant work is Verbakel (2013). In her work, the most recent wave of the European
Values Study 2008 was used with a sample of over 57,000 respondents from 44 countries and 2 regions
(Northern Ireland and Northern Cyprus) in Europe. Her research looked at the various economic and
cultural influences upon perceptions of leisure, employing a model that used both country-level and
individual-level independent variables. What is most relevant for this research is that one of the
independent variables used in the analysis was a dummy variable to denote those countries that had a
Communist heritage. What is noteworthy is that the dummy variable denoting Communist heritage
had a clear and consistent impact upon perceptions on leisure, since “a communist past has an
enduring effect on the way people think about learning new things in leisure time; despite the
upcoming market economies…” (Verbakel, 2013, pp. 681). Craig and Mullan (2013) found that Denmark
was different in terms of leisure in their sample, referencing the political impact of social democracy
and the social democratic welfare regime of the country. In addition, Verbakel (2013) found that there
was empirical evidence that the Communist heritage of a country would leave a lasting impact upon
societies, something asserted by Alesina and Fuchs-Schündeln (2007).
In sum, while there is substantial literature dealing with differences in terms of attitudes towards
leisure, there is very little known about how political systems and ideas have conditioned populations’
ethos towards leisure. While there are some indications that there are variations in attitudes towards
leisure based upon political variables, no large-scale investigation has looked at how different types of
political experiences have impacted perceptions of leisure.
So while there is some indication that political ideologies have left an impact upon perceptions of
leisure, there is no large scale research that has illustrated that Marxist attitudes (whether social
democratic or Communist) have permeated societies and made an impact upon how individuals view
leisure. In addition, no previous research has drawn a link between an individual’s self-placement on a
5
left-right scale and how this impacts upon their view of leisure. Here, we intend to fill in the gap in
the research by exploring the empirical relationship between leftist values systems, as embodied in
institutionalized and historical experiences, and their influence on a person’s perspective on the
importance of leisure. In addition, we look into how a person’s own political philosophy influences
attitudes towards leisure.
Methods and Analysis

For this analysis, World Values Survey (WVS) data were used. The World Values Survey is a
comprehensive global project of human values. The data gathering for the project takes place in waves
that often take years to collect. For this project, Wave 6 data were used, utilizing data from 2010-2014
and included data gathered from 59 countries, as it was in these countries in which a question about
leisure values was asked. There are over 85,000 interviews in the database for this wave. Additional
data from United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) were included in the database for this
study, using the Human Development Index (HDI) ranking of 2014 so data would have a more aligned
time frame for all variables included in this study, as a control variable.
The dependent variable for this analysis is responses to the following question: “For each of the
following, indicate how important it is in your life. Would you say it is…?” One of the matters asked
about is “leisure time.” Using a four-point scale, respondents were asked to assess the level of
importance of leisure time in their life from “very important” to “not at all important.” Responses to
the question range from “1” leisure time is “very important” to “4” leisure time is “not at all important.”
The scores were inverted for the purposes of this study so that higher numbers indicate an individual’s
higher valuation of leisure in her/his life, making interpretation of the data more intuitive. Descriptive
statistics for this variable are shown in Table 2, illustrating the data once missing values are removed.
Table 2. Dependent variable—importance of leisure
Frequency Percent
Not at all important (1) 3682 4.4
Not very important (2) 13883 16.5
Rather important (3) 35481 42.2
Very important (4) 31071 36.9
Total Valid 84117
Mean 3.1168
Standard Deviation 0.83419
Skewness -0.674
Kurtosis -0.191
The independent variables for this analysis exist at two different levels, the country-level and the
individual-level. A critical point of this analysis is to determine whether Marxist value systems
promulgated by states have influenced the populations’ perceptions of leisure. Overall, three country-
level variables were used in this study, including HDI ranking (4-point scale, 1=Very High; 4 = Low),
communist heritage state (dummy variable), and social democratic state (dummy variable). The HDI
is an index developed by the UNDP to measure the well-being of a country’s population. The HDI
ranking is based on the overall quality of life in the country by assessing variables such as life
expectancy at birth, Gross National Income (GNI), employment, standard of living, education quality,
and overall life satisfaction. For this analysis, they were grouped into four categories of human
development, (very high, high, medium, and low), the same categories the UNDP uses.
6
In terms of measuring the political influence of Marxism, two different independent variables have
been used, both of which are measured with a dummy variable. The reason two different dummy
variables are used was to delineate between the two prevailing factions of Marxism and their influence
upon leisure values. While both strains of Marxism have similarities, they developed and ruled with
different methods. To determine whether there is evidence that each ideological variant has had an
upon leisure values, two variables was needed. In denoting each of them, all countries are denoted
with a zero for social democracy or Communism, unless there is evidence of substantial and
prolonged social democratic regimes or Communist regimes. None of the countries investigated were
both Communist and social democratic regimes.
In delineating the social democratic states, the work of Esping-Andersen (1990) was consulted. Many
welfare states that have elements of social democracy in them although, as empirical classifications
show (Esping-Andersen, 1990). While other welfare states have components that are social democratic
in them, the social democratic approach to organizing a society prevails in Scandinavia and the
Netherlands. For example, the Canadian welfare state is almost entirely liberal in its setup, correcting
for market failures and creating state-mandated employment insurance schemes, although the health
service is set up upon socialist principles (unsurprisingly instigated by the social democrats).
So, for the dummy variable denoting social democratic countries, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, the
Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden have been denoted as being social democracies in nature, meaning
that the political economies are almost entirely based upon social democratic principles, as opposed
to other states such as Germany, Austria, and France in which other ideological principles have had a
strong impact upon the development of the welfare state. The social democratic countries are unique
in that they have had long-standing influence from social democratic governance almost continuously
since the end of World War Two. Their welfare states and school systems reflect social democratic
values, even when there are occasional governments that are not dominated by social democratic
parties. Their political cultures and welfare states are clearly social democratic in nature and have
almost no influence from conservative or liberal visions of how to organize a welfare state. Although
59 countries were included in the study, the Netherlands and Sweden were coded as “social
democratic” (“1” denoting social democratic state and “0” denoting non-social democratic state).
Despite having only two of the six potentially social democratic regimes in the sample, there were
1902 respondents in the Netherlands and 1206 respondents in Sweden to this particular questionnaire.
The other major independent variable to denote Marxist governance is a dummy variable to denote
those countries that had lived under Communist regimes. All the countries that were part of the
Soviet Union, all the Eastern Bloc states, all the countries that were part of Yugoslavia, and some other
long-standing Communist countries such as Cuba, China, and Vietnam were eligible to be denoted
with this dummy variable. Using this as a major independent variable follows on from the work of
Verbakel (2013), who used the same logic and independent variable but on a much smaller scale, as
her research did not go beyond the scope of Europe. In the sample, those denoted as being
Communist states were Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, China, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. Each was denoted with a one, as a
dummy variable, otherwise countries were denoted with a zero.
A summary of all the other independent variables considered for this analysis is shown in Table 3.
There are country-level as well as individual-level control variables used in the analysis.
7
Table 3. Independent variables

Level Variable Level of Measurement
Country Communist Heritage State Nominal
Social Democratic State Nominal
Human Development Index Grouping Ordinal (4-Point scale)
Individual Left/right self-identification Ordinal (10-Point Scale)
Age Interval
Male Nominal
Married Nominal
Number of Children Ordinal (8-Point Scale)
Social class Ordinal (5-Point Scale)
Highest Education Ordinal (9-Point Scale)
Feeling of happiness Ordinal (4-Point Scale)
State of Health Ordinal (4-Point Scale)
Life Satisfaction Ordinal (10-Point Scale)
Post-materialist index Ordinal (3Point scale)
The major political independent variable at the individual level of analysis is a person’s self-
identification on the left-right spectrum. The World Values Survey asks respondents to identify
themselves on a political scale from left to right. Respondents are given a 10-point scale item with “1”
indicating extreme leftists and “10” indicating those on the extreme right. There is considerable
overlap in terms of leftist values and Marxism in both its major strands. Since it is possible that a
person may reject Marxist thinking but live under a social democratic or Communist regime, this
variable is needed to measure an individual’s approach towards politics. While the left/right
dichotomy may not be as meaningful as it had been when it was first developed after the French
Revolution, people in many countries still persist in using the dichotomy, while it seems that the
dichotomy may simply be a way of representing preferences for social, political and economic equality
(Bobbio, 1997).
In addition, several attitudinal and demographic control variables were employed. The four attitudinal
variables taken into account were, feelings of happiness, a subjective assessment of health, overall
assessment of life satisfaction, and an overall look at the individual’s values system, based upon the
materialist/post-materialist index of Inglehart (1990; 1997). These individual-level variables were
extracted from the WVS. The relevant individual variables are measured as follows, feeling of
happiness (4-point scale, 1=Very happy; 4= Not at all happy), state of health (4-point scale, 1=Very
Good; 4=Poor), life satisfaction (10-point scale, 1=Completely dissatisfied; 10=Completely satisfied),
marital status, number of children, social class (5-point scale, 1=Upper class; 5=Lower class), gender,
highest education attained, and Post-materialist index (3-point scale, 1=Materialist; 2=Mixed; 3=Post-
materialist).
Results
Before conducting the analysis, the dummy variables denoting social democratic regimes, and
Communist heritage (or current) regimes, and the HDI categories were included into a data file along
with the World Values Survey data. Overall, there are over 80,000 interviews included in the analysis.
To begin delving into the relationship between political ideologies and leisure values, Pearson
correlations were performed using the dependent variable of interest and the three political indicators
of interest in the analysis. The outcome of the Pearson correlations is shown in Table 4. The bivariate
correlations show that the dummy variables denoting social democratic regimes and Communist
8
heritage countries run in two different directions. While these country-level dummy variables
indicate, in both instances, a statistically significant relationship, the direction of the relationship runs
in opposite directions, although the size of the correlations suggest that many other things are
probably influencing leisure values. The data suggest that placing a great deal of value on leisure is
higher in those regimes that are deemed social democratic, while Communist heritage regimes are
associated with lower levels of valuation of leisure by individuals. What is also interesting is that the
finding from the ordinal individual-level indicator shows that there is a relationship between self-
identification on the left/right spectrum with those that claim to be to the “right” valuing leisure less
than those who identify themselves with the “left.”
Table 4. Pearson bivariate correlations with political variables

Communist Social Democratic
Value of Leisure Heritage State State
Communist Heritage State Pearson Correlation -0.045***
N 84117
Social Democratic State Pearson Correlation 0.067*** -0.106***
N 84117 85070
Self-positioning in political scale Pearson Correlation -0.044*** -0.002 -0.020***
N 64017 64459 64459
Note: *** Significant at p<0.01
To assess the relationship among key variables, the analysis was broken into two parts: country-level
and individual level. For the country-level analysis, we first used HDI ranking, social democratic
states, and the Communist Heritage as independent variables and the perceived importance of leisure
time in life as dependent variable. Two different regressions were run, one using ordinal regression,
using SPSS, as the dependent variable is a four-point ordinal variable. In addition, another regression
was run using OLS regression, using the same variables. The results of the OLS regression are shown
in Table 5, for the sake of simplicity, as the MLE and OLS regression outcomes were very similar,
indicating very little difference in terms of the relationships between the variables.
Table 5. OLS regression with country-level variables

Dependent Variable: Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity
Value of Leisure Coefficients Coefficients t Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
(Constant) 3.392 0.008 443.832 ***
HDI Ranking 2013 -0.128 0.003 -0.141 -39.599 *** 0.946 1.058
Social Democratic State 0.140 0.016 0.032 8.905 *** 0.936 1.069
Communist Heritage State -0.092 0.007 -0.047 -13.377 *** 0.983 1.017
Model summary:
R 0.157
R2 0.025
Adjusted R2 0.025
Standard error of the estimate 0.828
N 81706
df 3
F 691.201 ***
Note: *** Significant at p < 0.01
9
Descriptive Statistics Mean Std. Deviation

Value of Leisure 3.11 0.838
HDI Ranking 2013 2.04 0.922
Social Democratic State 0.0376 0.190
Communist Heritage State 0.2358 0.424
Note: N=81706
Table 5 shows that the model holds little explanatory value with an adjusted R-squared value that is
.025. However, this is no surprise, as something as abstract and system-level as political factors are
utilized as indicators that are linked with individual lifestyle values. In addition, the high tolerance
value (>0.1) and low VIF (<10) indicate that there is no concern with collinearity in the regression. An
issue with tens of thousands of observations is that most of the independent variables are correlated
with the dependent variable, as the table shows. All of the independent variables used in the analysis
meet most standard criteria for statistically significant relationships. The findings generally illustrate
what is expected in very large data sets, low R-squared values and independent variables that show a
statistical relationship with the dependent variable (Lantz, 2013). What is interesting is the direction
of the coefficients, with two of the three indicators suggesting a negative relationship with the
dependent variable. In the case of the HDI, since the categories seem to be categorized counter-
intuitively, the data show that low HDI countries (less developed countries) tend to have people that
put less value on their leisure. In addition, it seems that people in those countries with a Communist
heritage also put less value on their leisure. However, we see that there is evidence that individuals in
social democratic countries value their leisure more than others, even when HDI is controlled for. For
the individual-level analysis, two more regressions were run, one using ordered logistic regression and
one with OLS regression. The results from the OLS regression are shown in Table 6, as the results of
the two regressions had no substantial analytical differences.
Table 6. OLS regression with individual-level variables

Dependent Variable: Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity
Value of Leisure Coefficients Coefficients t Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
(Constant) 3.239 0.030 108.510 ***
Self-positioning in political scale -0.016 0.001 -0.045 -11.100 *** 0.975 1.026
Age 0.001 0.000 0.011 2.353 ** 0.721 1.387
Males -0.008 0.007 -0.005 -1.195 0.987 1.013
Married -0.060 0.007 -0.036 -8.126 *** 0.813 1.231
Number of children -0.024 0.002 -0.051 -10.242 *** 0.666 1.501
Social class (subjective) -0.002 0.004 -0.002 -0.546 0.866 1.155
Highest educational level attained 0.024 0.002 0.069 15.736 *** 0.840 1.190
Feeling of happiness -0.098 0.005 -0.090 -18.766 *** 0.709 1.411
State of health (subjective) -0.056 0.005 -0.057 -12.217 *** 0.757 1.321
Satisfaction with life 0.018 0.002 0.048 10.270 *** 0.751 1.332
Post-materialist index 0.051 0.005 0.038 9.242 *** 0.976 1.024
Model summary:
R 0.204
R2 0.042
Adjusted R2 0.042
Standard error of the estimate 0.806
N 58822
df 11
F 233.130 ***
Note: *** Significant at p<0.01; ** Significant at p< 0.05
10
As above, the explanatory value of the model is not particularly strong, with an adjusted R-squared of
.042 and many of the independent variables show a statistical relationship with the dependent
variable, something expected in large data sets (Lantz, 2013). The high tolerance value (>0.1) and low
VIF (<10) indicate that there is no concern with collinearity in the regression, despite the large
number of independent variables employed in the analysis. However, what is interesting is that in a
simple regression, using only the political variable as the independent variable, the adjusted R-
squared statistic is only .002, so that the incorporation of the control variables leads to a substantial
increase in the explanatory value of the model. As above, the independent variables and the directions
of the coefficients are not particularly surprising. In addition, most of the independent variables
would be considered to be statistically significant, something not particularly surprising in a dataset of
tens of thousands of observations. However, there are two surprises, as the independent variables
denoting gender and social class seem to show no evidence of a relationship to the dependent
variable.
The key variable in the analysis is political values. It seems that the relationship between political
value systems (left/right) are related as shown in the bivariate correlations, meaning that right-wing
attitudes are not related to placing value upon leisure. However, some of the other independent
variables suggest thought-provoking relationships. One of the most interesting relationships shown is
that older and more-educated respondents seem to value leisure more than younger and less-
educated respondents. Other interesting demographic aspects that seem to influence attitudes
towards leisure are marriage and number of children, it seems that the direction of the coefficients
suggest that married people put less value on leisure than others. In addition, there is evidence that
having more children suppresses an individual’s valuation of her/his leisure. In addition, it seems that
life satisfaction is linked with higher valuation of leisure.
Conclusion
What the data shows is that political environments and political attitudes seem to play a role in terms
of conditioning a person’s attitude towards leisure, whether she or he knows it or not. The analysis
shows that while most Leninist regimes may have faded into history, they have left an imprint in the
post-Leninist societies, as has been asserted (Alesina & Fuchs-Schündeln, 2007), although the
relationship is a bit different than expected. We find no support for the notion that Communist
regimes created a culture that demands leisure, although the long-term institutionalization of a
working class-friendly ideology was something we expected to have left a lasting impact upon the
political sociology of formerly Communist-led populations.
The analysis also shows that the social democratic mindset has had a long-lasting stamp upon
populations in social democratic regimes, tending to influence individuals to value their leisure more
highly than otherwise. This stands in contrast to the lack of evidence of Marxist influence in formerly
Communist-ruled countries. While the Communist regimes and social democratic states have had
institutionalized structures that are pro-working class, it seems that the social democratic welfare
state has infused the minds of its citizenry in ways that make the citizens value leisure for themselves,
although the influence of the social democracy is modest.
In addition, it seems that at the individual level, political ideologies play a role in terms of
conditioning a person’s approach towards leisure, with people with right-wing tendencies putting less
value upon their leisure than others. This followed from what we expected, as left-wing ideologies
(largely influenced by Marxists) tend to favor working class leisure. While political ideologies seem to
11
impact upon a person’s stance on leisure, there are likely many intervening variables influencing a
person’s approach to leisure. It is likely that other social, cultural, and economic considerations are
more directly linked with approaches towards leisure, such as demographic characteristics, that are a
direct reflection of lifestyle, such as the availability of time for leisure because of family obligations or
education.
The findings go beyond that Craig and Mullan (2013) hinted at and what Verbakel (2013) found to be
empirically true. While Craig and Mullan (2013) explained how social democracy played a role in
changing law and conditions for people’s leisure, they did not solidly show this to be true for many
countries, merely highlighting the Danish experience and explaining that it created a different
environment for the experience of leisure than for other countries. Verbakel (2013) did show that
Communist heritage played an important role but did not show how this was true outside of Europe.
From a global study, we call into question whether Communist governance actually did influence
individuals’ stance on the value of leisure.
This research should be considered a substantial contribution to the literature on tourism and
political ideologies (Webster & Ivanov, 2016a; Webster & Ivanov, 2016b; Webster, et al., 2011). Since
tourism and leisure are shaped by the politics of a place and since perceptions of reality are shaped by
ideological forces, we can expect that political ideologies should continue to be something that will
influence leisure and industry for travel, tourism, and hospitality for some time. It is likely that the
impact of ideologies on the organization of tourism and leisure will continue into the future (Webster
&Ivanov, 2012).
All-in-all, the findings are suggestive that, at best, political values either as institutionalized into state
regimes or at the individual level, have only a modest impact upon leisure values. Future research
should delve further into the political realm to see how political ideas influence leisure attitudes in the
social world. More sophisticated models of the influence of political thinking are needed in terms of
understanding how it influences individual value systems. However, these finding suggest a starting
point, by looking into how social welfare states influence thinking, while, apparently, Communist
regimes did not.
While the analysis of the data is useful and give a good global analysis of the links between political
ideology and leisure, future research should continue to look at large-scale social experiences that
have shaped the expectations of populations for leisure. Hopefully in the future, better data will come
available enabling researchers to look more clearly into the generational differences within societies.
For example, there is reason to believe that those who grew up in a socialist environment may have a
very different perspective on leisure than those who grew up following the events of the autumn of
1989, when many socialist regimes collapsed. With better data from more countries, a great deal more
can be learned about attitudes in different countries and by measuring how ideologies that crossed
over borders could impact upon the attitudes that individuals have on leisure and related
activities/industries (travel, tourism, and hospitality).
In terms of tourism policy, the findings suggest some implications, especially in a globalized economy.
One issue is that marketing may take political philosophies into account when marketing tourism to
populations. While leisure may be considered by some to be apolitical, individuals seem to be shaped
by their political environments and thus have expectations towards leisure that will vary by the
individual and differ from country to country due to the different ways in which political philosophies
have embedded themselves into the political bureaucracy of countries, including the public school
12
systems. So, marketing may take somewhat different approaches to different market segments, taking
political attitudes and political socialization into account.
Future research should look more into how political ideas, political parties, and political regimes
create imprints upon individuals and expectations for leisure. These political things seem to play a
role in terms of conditioning individual values systems regarding leisure. More investigations into
how political ideas permeate society’s sense of leisure should be done, as purely cultural or economic
explanations seem to be lacking, as they miss the important role that political ideas play in the
formation of an ethos of leisure. Future research should also look at the source of people’s perceptions
of the importance of leisure, whether it is from a political ideology or from cultural expectations/
traditions, the two of which may be interconnected. While there is some modest evidence found here,
we know that other factors are influencing leisure values of populations.
Future research should also look more into generational differences with regards to leisure. In
Communist heritage regimes, it may be the case that there is a generational difference since older
generations and the newer ones grew up in very different circumstances. It may be that the older
generation of those living under communist regimes had experiences that were influenced by the
concept of the entitlement of leisure. It may well be that the younger generations have been
scrambling to make a living, rather living as their elders had, epitomized by the saying “[T]hey
pretend to pay us; we pretend to work.”
One thing that the data seem to show is that there is a positive feedback loop at play with Marxism
and its relationship to leisure. When institutionalized, Marxism can create a leisure entitlement,
something very different from different ideologies (Veal, 2010). Even when Marxist regimes fall, the
expectations set by the political parties and ideologies that create entitlements for leisure for all
citizens will be faced by opposition from citizens who have had raised hopes. All-in-all, the data have
shown us that ethics towards leisure is not an apolitical thing but in some ways conditioned by
political ideas, sometimes in the form of types of welfare states (whether in the present or the past),
but sometimes simply in people’s heads. The modest findings bring up a critical point, that leisure is
political and that future research in the values of leisure should take into account political attitudes
and the political environment in which leisure values are formed, as leisure in not just a market
transaction or an economic good, but a political value.
References
Alesina, A. and Fuchs-Schündeln, N. (2007). Good-bye Lenin (or not?): The effect of communism on
people’s preferences. The American Economic Review, 97(4), 1507–1528.
Bobbio, N. (1997) Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction (translated by Allan
Cameron), University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-06246-5
Chen, M., & Pang, X. (2012). Leisure motivation: An integrative review. Social Behavior and Personality:
An international journal, 40(7), 1075.
Chick, G. (1998). Leisure and culture: Issues for an anthropology of leisure. Leisure Sciences, 20(2), 111.
doi:10.1080/01490409809512269
Chick, G., Zinn, H., Yeh, C., & Liu, H. (2008). An exploration of meanings of leisure: A Chinese
perspective. Leisure Sciences, 30(5), 482-488. doi:10.1080/01490400802353257
Craig, L., & Mullan, K. (2013). Parental leisure time: A gender comparison in five countries. Social
Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 20(3), 329-357.
Cyba, E. (1992). Women's Attitudes Towards Leisure and Family, Loisir et Société / Society and Leisure,
15(1), 78-94.
13
Draper, A. and Ramsay, A. (2012). The good society: An introduction to comparative politics, 2edition.
Pearson.
Engel-Yeger, B. (2012). Leisure activities preference of Israeli Jewish children from secular versus
orthodox families. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 19(4), 341-349.
doi:10.3109/11038128.2011.600330
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) The three worlds of welfare capitalism, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fennel, D. (2006) Tourism ethics (Vol. 30). Channel View Publications.
Fuess Jr, S. M. (2012). Leisure in Japan, 1986–2006: A revival? Journal of Family and Economic Issues,
33(2), 250-260. doi:10.1007/s10834-012-9305-4
Gagliardi, C., Spazzafumo, L., Marcellini, F., Mollenkopf, H., Ruoppila, I., Tacken, M., & Szemann, Z.
(2007). The outdoor mobility and leisure activities of older people in five European countries.
Ageing & Society, 27(5), 683-700. doi:10.1017/S0144686X07006198
Gursoy, D., & Gavcar, E. (2003). International leisure tourists’ involvement profile. Annals of tourism
research, 30(4), 906-926. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(03)00059-8
Hollander, P. (1966). Leisure as an American and Soviet value. Social Problems, 14(2), 179-188.
doi:10.1525/sp.1966.14.2.03a00050
Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society, Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R. (1997) Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in
43 societies. Princeton University Press.
Lantz, B. (2013) The large sample size fallacy. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 27(2), 487-492.
Lee, K., & Kim, I. (2005). Estimating the value of leisure time in Korea. Applied Economics Letters,
12(10), 639-642. doi:10.1080/13504850500166295
Lee, SH. & Tideswell, C. (2005), Understanding attitudes towards leisure travel and the constraints
faced by senior Koreans, Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(3), 249-263.
Lovelock, B. and Lovelock, K. (2013) The ethics of tourism: Critical and applied perspectives. Routledge.
Macridis, Roy C. (1986) Contemporary political ideologies: Movements and regimes.
Mitani, N. (2012). Long-term trends in leisure and work hours. Japanese Economy, 39(4), 79-108.
doi:10.2753/JES1097-203X390404
O’Neil, P. (2012). Essentials of Comparative Politics (Fourth Edition). W. W. Norton & Company.
OECD (2018). Dataset: Average annual hours actually worked per worker.
https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=ANHRS
Sargent, L. T. (1996). Contemporary political ideologies: a comparative analysis. Wadsworth.
Rahkonen, O, Leino-Arjas, P, Kestilä, L, Jousilahti, P Prättälä, R (2016) Socio-demographic and
behavioral variation in barriers to leisure-time physical activity. Scandinavian Journal of Public
Health, 44(1), 62-69.
Schumaker, P. Keil, D. C. Heilke, T. W. (1997). Ideological voices: an anthology in modern political
ideas. McGraw Hill.
Sicilia-Camacho, Á., Delgado-Noguera, M., Gard, M., Águila, C., & Rojas Tejada, A. (2008).
Postmodern values and leisure in young Spanish university students: An exploratory study.
Leisure Sciences, 30(4), 275-292. doi:10.1080/01490400802165032
Sylvester, C. (2008). The Ethics of Experience in Recreation and Leisure Services. Journal of Park &
Recreation Administration 26 (4): 21–41.
Sylvester, C. D. (1987). The Ethics of Play, Leisure, and Recreation in the Twentieth Century, 1900–
1983. Leisure Sciences, 9 (3): 173–187.
Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational differences in work
values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of
Management, 36(5), 1117-1142. doi:10.1177/0149206309352246
Veal, A.J. (2010) Leisure, sport and tourism, politics, policy and planning, 3rd edition. CABI.
14
Verbakel, E. (2013) Leisure values of Europeans from 46 countries. European Sociological Review 29(3),
669–682.
Vincent, A. (2009). Modern Political Ideologies / Edition 3. Wiley Blackwell.
Wang, M., & Wong, M. C. S. (2014). Happiness and leisure across countries: Evidence from
international survey data. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(1), 85-118. doi:10.1007/s10902-013-9417-z
Webster, C., & Ivanov, S. (2016a). The ideologies of national security and tourist visa restrictions.
International Journal of Tourism Policy 6(3-4), 171-190.
Webster, C. & Ivanov, S. (2016b). Political ideologies as shapers of future tourism development.
Journal of Tourism Futures 2(2), 109-124.
Webster, C., S. Ivanov, S. Illum (2011) The paradigms of political economy and tourism policy:
National tourism organizations and state policy. In Mosedale, J. (ed.) Political economy of
tourism. A critical perspective. London: Routledge, pp. 55-73.
Webster, C., S. Ivanov (2012) The political economy of tourism in the future. In Leigh, J., C. Webster
and S. Ivanov (eds.) Future Tourism: Political, Social and Economic Challenges, London:
Routledge, pp. 21-34
World Values Survey Wave 6 2010-2014 Official Aggregate V.20150418. World Values Survey
Association (www.worldvaluessurvey.org). Aggregate File Producer: Asep/JDS, Madrid SPAIN.
Xiao, H. (1997). Tourism and leisure in China. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(2), 357-370.
doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(97)80006-0
Yan, W. (2013). Correlations of consumers, leisure motivation and leisure value with leisure benefits -
A case study on Taiwan international orchid show. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Sciences, 3(3), 267-276.
Zowisło, M. (2010). Leisure as a category of culture, philosophy and recreation. Physical Culture and
Sport Studies and Research, 50(1), 66-71. doi:10.2478/v10141-010-0024-y
Coordinating editor: Stanislav Ivanov
15
Knowledge Sharing in Strategic Alliance Relationships: An
Empirical Research on Hotels in Turkey
Nilüfer Vatansever Toylan 1*, Fatih Semerciöz 2 and Masood-Ul-Hassan 3
1 Department of Tourism Management, Kırklareli University, Turkey, E-mail: nilufer.vatansever@klu.edu.tr

2 Department of Business Management and Organization, Istanbul University, Turkey, E-mail:
fsemerci@istanbul.edu.tr
3 Department of Commerce, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan, E-mail: masood@bzu.edu.pk
Abstract
The study aims to investigate the influence of inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers-communication,
trust, shared vision, commitment, learning intent, and absorptive capacity directly and indirectly through inter-
organizational knowledge sharing process on behavioural innovation outcome in strategic alliances of 4- & 5-stars
hotels of world heritage cities of Istanbul and Antalya. For data collection, the quota sampling method is applied
to select the 250 senior hotel executives engaged in collaborative strategic hospitality alliances. Besides, to test
the hypotheses, descriptive, correlation as well as regression analyses are performed through the SPSS. The
current study finds that the six facets of relational and social capital inter-organizational knowledge sharing
enablers offered and examined have significant impacts, directly and indirectly through inter-organizational
knowledge sharing process on the innovative behavioural outcome of hospitality alliance firms. The results imply
that the hospitality industry in its policy agenda should recognize that relational and social capital-based
knowledge sharing strategic alliances can be a vital source of collaborative innovation. Finally, the current
research also provides the empirical recognition of historic cities of Turkey as cultural destinations, so
emphasizing the appropriateness of world heritage cities to investigate inter-firm relationships across hospitality
alliance firms.
Keywords: Inter-Organizational Knowledge Sharing, Alliances, Hospitality, Innovativeness
Citation: Toylan, N.V., Semerciöz, F, & Hassan, M.U. (2020). Knowledge Sharing in Strategic Alliance
Relationships: An Empirical Research on Hotels in Turkey. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2403

RESEARCH PAPER 1
Knowledge Sharing in Strategic Alliance Relationships: An Empirical Research on Hotels in Turkey
Introduction
The ability to create and diffuse knowledge both at intra and inter-firm level is becoming growingly
more vital in a contemporary knowledge-based economy. Empirical studies over the past three
decades show that an organization may significantly increase its knowledge and innovative abilities by
capitalizing the capabilities of others through the sharing of knowledge both within and across firms
(Dyer and Singh, 1998; Easterby-Smith, Lyles, & Tsang, 2008; Chen, Lin, & Yen, 2018). The underlying
assumption for the existence of such "organizations of organizations" (Provan, 1983) is that as opposed
to the unity of command based hierarchical forms, knowledge-creating resources command more
value to produce more innovation in alliance firms including traveling and tourism (Zach and Hill,
2017).
Specifically, in hospitality functioning, since, knowledge is concerned to a firm’s offerings, customers,

competitors, operational methods, and job associates (Yang and Wan, 2004), therefore, sharing
knowledge between firms carries more complication because of the complex nature of the cultures,
processes, and boundaries involved. It is, thus, an attracting area for further theoretical investigation
in strategic alliances (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). Therefore, Kim, Lee, Paek, and Lee (2013) asserted
that to effectively execute knowledge management, a comprehensive understanding of the
interrelationship among its variables–knowledge sharing enablers, its processes, and outcomes–is
essential in hospitality organizations.
Although Knowledge management has become apparent over the past 20 years as one of the most
discussed management perspectives, however, in the tourism sector, it has not attained the same
amount of empirical research and applications as in other domains (Kim and Shim, 2017).
Nevertheless, after an epochal work in the field (Hall, 1999 in terms of issue of partnership in tourism
from a public policy perspective; Jamal and Getz, 1995 in terms of multi-stakeholder processes for
destination management and planning) within the standpoint of destinations as ‘networks’, tourism
researchers started to analyze inter-firm knowledge sharing vis-à-vis cluster theory, social capital,
cooperation, community tourism, and strategic management (Kim and Shim, 2017). However, still as
compared to other fields, in hospitality industry, academicians and policymakers have not tried to
incorporate holistically relational and social capital factors such as trust, commitment, learning
intent, shared vision, absorptive capacity and communication (Hamel, 1991; Inkpen and Crossan, 1995;
Lane and Lubatkin, 1998; Grant and Baden-Fuller, 2004; Inkpen and Tsang, 2005; Merlo, Bell, Mengüç,
& Whitwell, 2006; Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998; Yli‐Renko, Autio, & Sapienza, 2001; Molina‐Morales
and Martínez‐Fernández, 2010) as inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers in to an
integrative model that explores its relationship with inter-organizational knowledge sharing processes
(Kale, Singh, & Perlmutter, 2000; Kogut & Zander, 1992), and firm innovation behaviour (Hurt,
Katherine, & Chester, 1977; Maggioni, Marcoz, & Mauri, 2014).
Keeping in view these backgrounds, the aim of current study is to propose an integrative model that
investigates the impact of inter-organizational knowledge sharing (KS) enablers-trust, commitment,
learning intent, shared vision, absorptive capacity and communication-on process-inter-
organizational knowledge sharing behaviour-as a means to behavioural innovation outcome in
strategic alliances of 4- & 5-stars hotels of world heritage cities of Istanbul and Antalya. In other
words, the present study target to examine the mediation role of inter-organizational knowledge
sharing process in the relationship of inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers and outcome.
To this end, the current study hypothesizes a KS enablers-process-outcome model (Figure 1) to
assume that based on inter-organizational relational factors, alliance actors share their work-related
experience, expertise, know-how, and contextual information (Liu, 2018) to produce both intra and
2
Toylan et al. (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2403
inter alliance-based behavioural innovativeness outcome-willingness of the firm to get newness from
partners (Hurt et al., 1977; Maggioni et al., 2014).
The current study contributes to the existing literature. Firstly, the current research shows how inter-
organizational knowledge sharing behaves as an intermediary variable between inter-organizational
relational and social capital factors, and innovative behaviour. Secondly, the present study provides
theoretical enlightenments and empirical confirmation in support of innovation as a combination of
intra and inter alliance-based innovation, and inter-organizational knowledge sharing as a relational
capital to transfer know-how and learning across the alliance partners in tourism destinations.
Thirdly, the current study underpins association between the relational view of inter-organizational
competitive advantage (Dyer & Singh, 1998), social capital perspective (Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998),
knowledge-based view (Nonaka, 1994) and Schumpeterian view of innovations (Schumpeter, 1934) in
terms of creation of new knowledge from the assimilation of external knowledge with existing one as a
key to generate innovation (Elche, Martínez-Pérez, & García-Villaverde, 2017). Fourthly and finally,
the current work underscores the originality of a context of research, the cultural tourism destinations
of the World Heritage Cities-Istanbul and Antalya-of Turkey.
The remainder of this paper discusses the research context, literature review and hypotheses
development, research methodology, research findings, discussion and conclusion, followed by
theoretical and practical implications. Finally, the paper presents the study limitations and future
directions.
Research Context
Following the security incidents and failed coup in the year 2016, Turkey has been ranked among the
top 10 countries regarding international tourist arrivals-39,478,000-however, in terms of receipts-
$26,616.0 million-moved down five points to 17th position. Moreover, having a world ranking of 44th
out of 133 in terms of Traveling and Tourism (T&T), Turkey T&T industry contributed 5% and 2.3% to
GDP and employment respectively (World Economic Forum, Travel & Tourism Competitiveness
Report, 2017; United Nations World Tourism Organization, Tourism Highlights, 2017). However, out
of total foreign visitors, 50% of foreign visitors preferred to visit destinations of Istanbul (36%) and
Antalya respectively. Moreover, in terms of a tourism operation, licensed rooms by the city in Turkey,
Antalya was the leader with 193.506 rooms, followed by Istanbul with 51.483.
Besides, international hotel groups with different brands - Accor, Best Western, Carlson Rezidor,
Hilton, Hyatt, InterContinental, Marriott, and Wyndham have recognized the long-term potential of
Turkey, and have remained committed to putting considerable investments in the country (Ernst
Young, Tourism Industry Oversea, 2017).
Therefore, to ensure the Traveling and Tourism (T&T) sustained growth in an uncertain security
environment while protecting the local and natural environment on which it so enormously relies, the
Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Turkey envisioned to transform Turkey within 5 top world brands
in tourism destinations in terms of highest number of tourist and revenues by the end of 2023
(Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 2007). However, in comparison to this vision, in Global
Competitiveness Index 2016-2017 report, overall, Turkey drops four places to 55th and in innovation
ranked as 71 out of 136 world economies. Thus, a sound innovation tourism service ecosystem (Barile,
Ciasullo, & Triosi, 2017), where individuals or firms across the service ecosystem collaborate on
innovation is needed to increase the Turkish T&T industry’s competitiveness (WEF, Global
3
Competitiveness Index, 2016-2017) by the adoption of new or improved market offerings, processes,
managerial techniques and market search (OECD-Eurostat, 2005).
Literature Review
This section after characterizing the current global hotel market dynamics within the context of value
co-creation, presents the details about the nature of knowledge sharing hospitality alliances followed
by its knowledge-based view.
As one of the fastest growing industries globally, tourism is regarded as a dynamic subscriber to
wealth and job creation, cultural preservation, poverty alleviation, and environmental protection.
Therefore, more than any other business sector, the current global hotel market is characterized by
consolidations, take-overs, and strategic alliances. The harnessing of hospitality's positive
contribution to sustainable development calls for substantial strategic equity and non-equity-based
partnerships by all tourism stakeholders to foster innovation in line with the 2030 agenda for
sustainable development (Chathoth & Olsen, 2003; UNWTO, 2018).
Therefore, as firms in hospitality sector co-creating the image and meaning of the destinations
(Saraniemim & Kylanen, 2011), constant innovative behaviour is vital during competing with other
organizations in the same destination as well as during cooperating to contest with other destinations
for well dynamic visitors (Hjalager, 2010b). Thus, value is co-created by all players participated
throughout the practice of the experience, as soon as knowledge is shared (Prahalad & Ramaswamy,
2004) through the inherent structure of the industry. Hence, service viewpoint can increase such
knowledge sharing by persons or organizations as a system of service exchange-application of
resources i.e., knowledge and skills for the benefit of another. Thus, the relational nature of service
exchange enables knowledge sharing that stimulates innovation (Greer, Lusch, & Vargo, 2016). Due to
these features, along with the globalization of the tourism sector, the hotel industry especially is
forced to offer an immediate and successful customer experience that is valuable to consumers from
diverse cultures. Therefore, to gain a competitive edge, tourism sectors are bound to formulate and
execute novel strategies to appeal to customers by offering experiences that have not previously been
made available (Gomezelj, 2016).
However, behind the innovative activity in destinations, knowledge is a critical factor, whether
external or internal (Camisón, Boronat-Navarro, & Forés, 2018), incorporated or tacit (localized),
incorporated (Hjalager, 2010a), analytical, synthetic or symbolic (Asheim, Boschma, & Cooke, 2011).
Notably, in the emerging knowledge-based society, the capacity to share knowledge beyond tourism
organizations has been shown to impart to their innovative behaviour (Zach & Hill, 2017) in terms of
improvement in tourism including products, services, and experiences (Hjalager, 2010a), and
developments in creating client relationship (Ottenbacher & Gnoth, 2005). Therefore, it is crucial to
understand likelihood for rival tourism organizations with the complementary or similar market
offerings. For the stated reason, these should work together via strategic alliances and provide channel
to outside knowledge bases, as an important input, to the innovative practices of tourism
organizations. Consequently, this helps in bring additional tourists to a destination for the shared
advantage of all key players (von Friedrichs Grängsjö and Gummesson, 2006).
Knowledge Sharing Hospitality Alliances

Nevertheless, comprehending knowledge denotes recognition for the complexities of accessing,
sharing, and assimilating knowledge in a learning climate, where firms cannot develop knowledge
until and unless individual knowledge is shared with other persons and teams (Inkpen,1998, p.69- 71)
4
to create new services in hotel industry (Tang, Wang & Tang, 2015). Therefore, in the hospitality
sector, team members are ever more sharing their knowledge and experience to supply innovative
offerings (Hu, Horng, & Sun, 2009). Hotel managers wishing to increase service capacity must
assimilate extensively disintegrated knowledge into innovative offerings (Nicolau & Santa-Maria 2013).
However, the possible part of alliances in empowering destinations and organizations to approach
useful outside sources of knowledge is a necessary prerequisite for improving their competitive edge
(Van Niekerk, De Martino, & Scott, 2017, p.5). Therefore, collaborative alliances have been
demonstrated to facilitate organizational and destinations innovation, respectively (Denicolai,
Cioccarelli, & Zucchella, 2010). Simply put, in hospitality destinations, alliances and innovation are
instantly interweaved and much valuable (Zach & Hill, 2017).
Within the context of knowledge sharing in tourism alliances, Jetter and Chen (2012, p. 132) defined
both 1) collaboration as “a process in which two or more individuals possessing complementary skills
and attributes interact to create a shared meaning or understanding that could not have been created
without the other individual”, and 2) strategic alliances as “purposive, inter-organizational
relationships, in which the organizations share similar goals, strive for mutual benefits, and have an
understanding of a high level of mutual dependence”. Therefore, in tourist destinations, to boost
competencies, market offerings as well as competitive position globally, alliances between (a) buyers-
sellers; (b) suppliers-distributors; (c) multiple suppliers, and (d) training & research centers in the
value chain often requires allied firms to share knowledge so as to establish a shared knowledge base
which assists as a ‘platform’ whereupon they can better simply create innovative knowledge-based
resources (Grant and Baden-Fuller, 2000; Okumus, Altinay, & Chathoth, 2010; Koo, Ricci, Cobanoglu,
& Okumus, 2017).
Therefore, in destination literature, alliances and collaborations in terms of interdependence,

complementary skills, shared meaning (goals) and mutual benefits incline to focus on three dominant
theoretical paradigms: transactions cost (Williamson, 1975), resource dependency (Pfeffer and
Salancik, 1978), and social exchange theory (Dwyer, Schurr, & Oh, 1987). However, no individual
theoretical approach is presently able to describe the complicated nature of destination collaboration
(Wang and Xiang, 2007). Besides, innovating denotes employing knowledge to develop a new
understanding (Drucker, 1993), and social relationships contribute a vital part in this activity (Nonaka
& Takeuchi, 1995; Nonaka, 1994; Kogut & Zander 1992). Therefore, the current research is grounded on
the context of hospitality strategic alliances that provides an exciting and rich contextual base to study
the inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers-process-outcome phenomenon. The study
incorporated the relational, social capital, and knowledge-based theoretical lenses (Dyer & Singh,
1998; Inkpen & Tsang, 2005; Grant & Baden Fuller, 2004; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998) with innovative
behaviour in the cultural tourism destinations (Hjalager, 2010b; Van Niekerk et al., 2017; Zach & Hill,
2017; Liu, 2018).
Knowledge-based View of Knowledge Sharing Hospitality Alliances

The knowledge-based view (KBV) of the alliances brings a new point of view to inter-firm
collaboration by acquiring and assimilating knowledge to produce innovative offerings (Capaldo,
2014). The knowledge-based theory provides that the primary aim of alliances is to increase the
productivity of every ally's knowledge usage via integration of knowledge (Grant & Baden-Fuller,
2000). This collaborative innovation in alliance firms is the result of the convergence process of tacit
(personal, trying to communicate) with explicit (codified, transmittable) knowledge in four different
ways (Okumus, 2013):
5
 Tacit-to-tacit-socialization-sharing experiences to create shared mental models-In hotel a

worker can acquire new knowledge from his/her superior or coworker listening and observing
by how clients’ grievances are handled.
 Tacit-to-explicit-externalization-expressing and articulating knowledge using analogies-
Employees of a section in a hotel can discuss routine client grievances and together create
specific strategies and directions describing how to answer to clients’ grievances.
 Explicit to tacit-internalization-learning by doing- A hotel worker can undertake a non-
identical perspective and may notice that this innovative way functions. In this case, this
worker has tacit knowledge.
 Explicit to explicit-combination-systemize concepts into a knowledge system- A hotel
undertaking may opt their standard hotel opening manual to create a manual for resort
openings.
Thus, the knowledge creation process is represented as a helix, working at the individual, group, firm,
and inter-firm levels, in which socialized knowledge is externalized, systemized via combination, and
later internalized, in virtue of creating a new and improved round of developing socialized knowledge,
and so forth (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).
Hypotheses Development
Effects of Inter-Organizational Knowledge Sharing Process upon Innovative Behaviour
While, technologies likely to build on trajectories, however, innovative offerings incline to demand a
creative mix of new knowledge. Besides, to serve the market as a leader with innovative offerings often
requires the capability to recognize, approach, and assimilate rapidly beyond the kinds of knowledge
needed for a creative product class. Therefore, the current study proposes that since tourism (hotels)
alliances can exploit specialized expertise across multiple products, thus, are better to both internal
administrations within the tourism organization and tourism market contracts. Besides, the current
study further argues that alliance partners in the hotel industry as the most important source of new
ideas and information through knowledge sharing practices can allow the sharing, creation, or
recombination of knowledge that results in the innovative behavioural outcome (Grant & Baden-
Fuller, 2000). These are structured inter-organizational methods that are intentionally planned to
enable knowledge sharing between networked firms (Dyer & Singh, 1998, p. 665).
In other words, it means that innovation is created through retrieving, harnessing, and assimilating
flows of knowledge beyond the organizational boundaries (Chesbrough, 2017, p. 35) including tourism
where businesses operate through networks of relationships in geographical proximity (Von
Friedrichs Grängsjö & Gummesson, 2006). This collaborative innovation depends on purposively
managed inter-organizational knowledge sharing by using (non) idiosyncratic mechanisms to
motivate and guide knowledge sharing (Chesbrough & Bogers, 2014). Thus, within the hotel industry,
the broadest value proposition is that knowledge sharing could generate firm innovation (e.g.
development of new marketing offerings, growth of firm performance outside a mere internal vision
that targets to combine their competitiveness over other hotels to include an external view where
relational capabilities play a vital part in exchange of knowledge for joint learning and innovation
(Rodríguez-Díaz & Espino-Rodríguez, 2006). Thus, keeping in view the above, the current study
hypothesizes:
Hypothesis 1: Inter-organizational Knowledge sharing process has a positive association with innovative
behavioural outcome of firms in hospitality alliance.
6
Relational & Social Capital as Innovative Knowledge Sharing Enablers

While, alliances involve co-development, exchange, and sharing of resources, however, our interest is
alliances in which partners gain access to the skills and knowledge of their partners (Inkpen,1998, p
70; Gulati & Gargiulo, 1999, p. 1440) to generate innovations (Capaldo, 2014). However, acquiring of
knowledge has been known as a direct benefit of relational or social capital (Nahapiet & Ghoshal,
1998). The current study, therefore, seeks to understand how knowledge is shared within hospitality
alliances and how relational and social capital affects the knowledge shared to generate innovation.
In this regard, as an addition of the resource-based perspective, the relational view proposes that
competitive edge obtains not merely from organizational resources, but also hard-to-copy skills
rooted in alliance relationships (Dyer & Singh, 1998). Thus, by developing knowledge-sharing
practices, relation-specific resources, and successful relational governance systems into alliances,
organizations can capitalize their relational assets for knowledge exploration and exploitation
(Yli‐Renko et al., 2001). Notably, the more alliance firm absorptive capacity to identify and integrate
innovative knowledge from their alliance companion is the more possibility to create innovative
relational rents by knowledge sharing (Dyer & Singh, 1998). Whereas, the essential idea of the social
capital view is that alliances through the constructs of relational, structural, and cognitive constructs
of their social capital-trust, strong ties, and shared vision-offer accession to invaluable resources
including knowledge acquiring, combination, and transfer to create value (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998;
Nieves & Osorio, 2013). Therefore, the current study suggests the following constructs of relational &
social capital as innovative knowledge sharing enablers:
 Communication: Strong ties in alliances mirrors the proximity of relationship between allies
and enhances with the frequency of closeness and communication (Hansen, 1999). It is
therefore presumed that quality communication in terms of strong ties within alliances will
result in more efficient and to the point multifaceted knowledge sharing outcomes than weak
ties (Reagans & McEvily, 2003). Therefore, tourism firms' collaboration with multiple partners
to share knowledge to develop innovations further mainly depends on open, frequent, timely,
accurate, and relevant quality communication (Beritelli, 2011). Thus, effective inter-
organizational communication facilitates tourism firms to let other partners share knowledge
on innovation development dynamically (Zach, 2016).
 Trust: Rivals hotels with identical market offerings and the target segments have prospered in
utilizing social capital to inculcate trust in one another. The belief of trust has motivated
them to undertake diverse marketing approaches. Thus, the prevalence of relational trust
between firms in business contexts enables the sharing of opportunity exploration and
exploitation, besides of organizational and technical knowledge, in manners that assist to a
win-win situation in hospitality alliances (von Friedrichs Grängsjö & Gummesson, 2006).
Thus, inter-organizational trust is a particularly significant factor in participant-governed
destination alliances and is the core of business relationships and raises the intention of
knowledge acquisition and sharing beyond firms’ boundaries (Beaumont & Dredge, 2010).
 Shared Vision: As partners of alliance firms share values and collective vision, they will get
nearer and more eagerly to interact and share job-related knowledge as time fallows, and
more probably to increase the accumulated existing skills and knowledge (Li and Chang,
2016). Sharing same vision and goals during work allow workers to develop into peers, shared
out innovative problem-solving routines, boost the pace of knowledge sharing and improve
individual's capacities (Carmeli, Gelbard, & Reiter‐Palmon, 2013). Thus, sharing knowledge
encompasses a plethora of data and is particularly vital in a hospitality destination alliance as
knowledge sharing warrants assurance to shared vision (Shaw & Williams, 2009).
7
 Learning Intent: Alliance partners’ knowledge sharing cannot guarantee innovations unless
the embedded firms assume that firm learning is depended upon accession to innovative
knowledge and the abilities for utilizing and creating on such knowledge (Inkpen, 1998, p.
69). Thus, in knowledge-based alliances, learning effectiveness is primordial (Serrat, 2017).
Therefore, the hospitality organizations should always modify their learning capacity to
develop social capital quickly, that can facilitate the productive knowledge sharing of attained
prospects and in enhancing overall productivity. However, such learning ability to gather
social capital to further lead adequate knowledge sharing to generate innovation in the
cultural and creative firms of hospitality sector originates from their higher level of learning
intention (Liu, 2018) or tendency to consider collaboration as a learning opportunity (Hamel,
1991) that impacts the alliance firm’s decision to originate learning and generate new
knowledge (Inkpen, 2000).
 Commitment: Much knowledge is nuanced, subtle, and difficult to verify, thus, partners do
not fully consider impersonal sources (Granovetter, 2005), and, therefore, sharing, exchange,
or co-inventing in alliances follow continuous commitment between the partners (Gulati &
Gargiulo, 1999, p. 1440) that can provide basis of relational social norms to develop productive
long-term relations (Gundlach, Achrol, & Mentzer, 1995). Partner commitment is the
disposition of the partners regarding allocating necessary resources towards the alliance and
forfeiting short-term profits against long-term gains of the alliance (Gundlach et al., 1995).
Moreover, trust-commitment theory (Morgan & Hunt, 1994) underlines the significance of
collaboration across alliances to compete successfully within swift dynamic competing
environments. Relational trust and commitment are two primary constructs that motivate
firms to counter opportunistic behaviours and thus, protect long-term relational rents (Chen,
Lin, & Yen, 2014).
 Absorptive Capacity: Without partners’ absorptive capacity ‘to recognize the value of new
knowledge and assimilate the knowledge for commercial purposes’ (Inkpen, 1998, p. 75),
organizations cannot deploy outside knowledge to earn their competitive edge (Tzokas, Kim,
Akbar, & Al-Dajani, 2015). Therefore, absorptive capacity facilities organizations to rapidly
realize and assimilate outside knowledge and to dynamically shift that know-how into leading
offerings (Peltokorpi, 2017). Thus, the transition of knowledge sharing into better firm
performance can only materialize if there was a positive absorption capacity for innovative
thoughts (Levitt & March, 1988). Notably, in the hospitality and tourism sector, absorptive
capacity allows organizations to identify the worth of external knowledge profitably to
generate innovation (Pace, 2016).
Thus, relational and social capital through its dimensions facilitates the generation of innovative
knowledge. Therefore, especially, in hospitality sector, recent research on knowledge sharing through
relational or social capital has started to acknowledge the central part of the different constructs of
relational and social capital to generate innovation (Martínez-Pérez, García-Villaverde, & Elche, 2016;
Tang, 2016; García-Villaverde, Elche, Martínez-Pérez, & Ruiz-Hortega, 2017; Zach & Hill, 2017; Liu,
2018; Idrees, Vasconcelos, & Ellis, 2018; Camisón et al.,2018). Therefore, by following the seminal
studies (Inkpen & Tsang, 2005; Dyer & Singh, 1998; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998; Kogut & Zander, 1992),
the current study proposes that in hospitality industry, the degree to which partners utilize their
alliances to gain and exploit knowledge is governed by relational and social capital based inter-
organizational knowledge sharing enablers such as communication, trust, and shared vision (Merlo,
Bell, Mengüç, & Whitwell, 2006; Nahapiet & Ghoshal 1998: Yli-renko et al., 2001; Molina‐Morales &
Martínez‐Fernández, 2010) as well as learning intent (Hamel, 1991), absorptive capacity (Levitt &
8
March, 1988), and commitment (Gundlach et al.,1995). So, keeping in view the above discussion, the
current study further hypothesizes:
Hypothesis 2a-2f: Inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers-(a) communication, (b) trust, (c)
shared the vision, (d) commitment, (e) learning intent, and (f) absorptive capacity each has a positive
association with inter-organizational knowledge sharing process.
Hypothesis 3a-3f: Inter-organizational knowledge sharing process mediates the relationship between
Inter-organizational Knowledge sharing enablers-(a) communication, (b) trust, (c) shared the vision, (d)
commitment, (e) learning intent, and (f) absorptive capacity each respectively and innovative
behavioural outcome of firms in hospitality alliance.
Hypothesis 4a-4f: Inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers-(a) communication, (b) trust, (c)
shared the vision, (d) commitment, (e) learning intent, and (f) absorptive capacity each has a positive
association with innovative behavioural outcome of firms in hospitality alliance.
Communication
H2a
Trust H2b H3a-3f
Shared Vision H2c Inter-Organizational H1 Organizational

H2d Knowledge Sharing Innovation Behaviour
Commitment
H2e
Learning Intent
H2f
Absorptive Capacity
H4a-4f
Enablers Process Outcome
Figure 1. Research Model
Methodology
Data Collection and Sampling
The research hypotheses developed in the preceding part were tested by utilizing survey data gathered
from the senior executives (i.e., presidents, CEOs, vice-presidents, directors, or general managers)
engaged in collaborative strategic alliances of Antalya and Istanbul based national and international 4
and 5-star certified Turkish hotels by Ministry of Culture and Tourism. The reason to choose the
provinces of Istanbul and Antalya is that being one of the oldest cultures of Turkey; they are at the top
world cultural heritage cities-cum-tourist hotspots in the list of the global sea-sand-sun tourism
destinations. Moreover, as per 2017 tourism figures, Forbes Travel has placed Istanbul as 6th out of 10th
as world’s top most-visited cities. On the other hand, Antalya is the most preferred city in Turkey
based on the number of incoming foreign visitors. Therefore, more than half of the national and
international branded hotels (e.g., Hilton, Dedeman, Rixos, and Sheraton, etc.) in the country are
massed in these two provinces (Investment Support and Promotion Agency of Turkey, 2018; Ernst
Young, Tourism Industry Oversea, 2017). Moreover, a phenomenon of strategic alliance formation
mostly practiced in large-scale organizations (Norman, 2004), and congruency with respect to
organizational structure and size exists between 4 and 5-star hotels, therefore, for data collection, list
9
and contact information of 4 and 5 stars certified hotels located in Istanbul and Antalya was obtained
from the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Specifically, Antalya and Istanbul have over 500
and 200 4&5-star hotels, respectively (Investment Support and Promotion Agency of Turkey, 2018;
Ernst Young, Tourism Industry Oversea, 2017). Therefore, more than seven hundred 4 and 5-star
national and international hotels created the population of the current study. However, to save time
and to minimize cost, a non-probabilistic version of stratified sampling and survey methodology, the
quota sampling method was applied (Acharya, Prakash, Saxena, & Nigam, 2013) to select the
percentage-statistical sample of individuals from within a statistical population of seven hundred 4&5
star certified hotels of Antalya and Istanbul. As a result, with, 95% confidence, 5 percent-plus/minus-
precision, 50 percent proportion of the population which has the attribute in question, and Z values of
1.96, the current study achieved a sample size of 248 (Cochran, 1963). Thus, 300 survey questionnaires
were distributed. Out of them, a total of 250 were collected. However, out of these 250 collected
questionnaires, after deducting 20 odd filled ones, the remaining 230 were processed for final analysis.
Survey Instrument
The measurement scale of the constructs used in the current study were adapted from valid, reliable,
and well-established scales (see Table1). Furthermore, to motivate the sample executives of 4&5 hotels
to complete the survey, the cover letter was initially provided in the instrument. Besides, to create the
shared meaning among the sample respondents, the definition of the strategic alliance was also
offered in the instrument. Moreover, as a Likert-type instrument presumes that the strength of
experience is linear, i.e., on a continuum from strongly agree to strongly disagree (Likert, 1932),
therefore, the respondents were advised to rate the statements included in sections 2, 3, and 4 by
using 5-point scale (5-definitely agree, 4-agree, 3-neither agree nor disagree, 2-disagree, 1-strongly
disagree). However, the first section of the questionnaire included the statements concerning
existence, duration, type, and sector of a strategic alliance relationship as well as ownership type of
hotel, extranet to share information and data, service development unit, and several stars, rooms, and
employees.
Besides, the second section within the context of strategic alliances included the 27 statements related
to inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers-(a) communication, (b) trust, (c) shared vision,
(d) commitment, (e) learning, and (f) absorptive capacity adapted from previous research (see Table
1). Besides, with 11 statements adapted from previous research (see Table1), the third section of the
survey instrument was targeted to measure to inter-organizational knowledge sharing behaviours
(process) of the hotels within the strategic alliance formation. Moreover, in the fourth section with 8
statements targeted to measure the innovativeness outcome possessed by the hotels, also adapted
from the previous research (see Table 1).
Table 1. Constructs and Scale References

Construct (scales) References
Trust Li (2005); Norman (2004); Mohr and Speakman (1994); Inkpen (1992)
Learning Intent Norman (2004); Inkpen (1992)
Communication Cheng et al. (2008); Mohr and Speakman (1994)
Absorptive Capacity Malhotra et al. (2005)
Shared vision Li and Lin (2006)
Commitment Li and Lin (2006)
Interorganizational Kale (2000); Kogut and Zander (1992); Simonin (1999); Lee (2001); Chen
knowledge sharing (2004)
Innovativeness Hurley and Hult (1998); Calantone et al. (2002); Maggioni et al. (2014)
10
Finally, by following the existing research, the back-translation strategy was utilized (Brislin, 1980;
cited in Hassan & Ayub, 2019). Therefore, initially, the survey statements were produced in English
and were then translated into Turkish. Subsequently, the research statements were converted back
into English to avoid the difference of the sense generated by language translation (Köseoglu, Yazici,
& Okumus, 2017).
Validity and Reliability of Instruments

To shape the latent formation of the measurement model (Brown, 2006), the 44-item measurement
instrument comprising 27-item-inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers, 11item-inter-
organizational knowledge sharing process, and 8-item-innovativeness outcome each was submitted to
principal component factor analysis (PCA) under varimax rotation through SPSS. The aim was to
provide validity for constructs used in the analysis by reducing the larger set of 44-statements into a
smaller set of inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers, inter-organizational knowledge
sharing process, and innovativeness outcome (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 1998). As a
result of the factor analysis (see Table 2), out of twenty-seven, 24 statements with factor loadings of
more than 0.50 value as well as with Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sample adequacy
(Williams, Onsman, & Brown, 2010) value of 0.890, loaded into six factors of the inter-organizational
knowledge sharing enablers-(a) communication, (b) trust, (c) shared vision, (d) commitment, (e)
learning, and (f) absorptive capacity. Moreover, together, these six inter-organizational knowledge
sharing enablers (factors) explained 70.565 percent of the total variance explained. Besides, the
reliabilities for these inter-organizational knowledge sharing facilitators in terms of Cronbach’s alpha
values were between 0.65 and 0.88, which were considered acceptable (Gliem & Gliem, 2003).
Similarly, the results of the factor analysis of 11 statement-inter-organizational knowledge sharing

process (see Table 2) with factor loadings of more than 0.50 value as well as with Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin
(KMO) measure of sample adequacy value of 0.920, loaded into one factor explained 59.04% of the
total variance explained. Besides, the reliability of inter-organizational knowledge sharing process in
terms of Cronbach’s alpha value calculated as 0.927, which was considered as excellent (Gliem &
Gliem, 2003). However, the results of the factor analysis of 8-statement-innovativeness outcome (see
Table 2) with factor loadings of majority of the items exceeding over 0.50 value as well as with Kaiser–
Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sample adequacy value of 0.812, loaded into two factors jointly
explained 63.948 percent of the total variance explained. Besides, the reliability of these two factors of
hotels innovativeness in terms of Cronbach’s alpha values ranges from 0.736 to 0.835, which were
considered acceptable (Gliem & Gliem, 2003). However, for final analysis, these two factors of
innovativeness outcomes were merged into single factor.
Table 2. Validity and Reliability Analysis

Indicator Cronbach’s
Constructs and items Mean SD
Loadings Alpha
Absorptive Capacity 0.884
Our Alliance partner enables us to develop 4.18 0.834 0.748
products/services for end customers.
Our alliance partner enables us to find better ways to 4.15 0.865 0.732
market the products/services.
Our alliance partners allow us to better understand 4.05 0.965 0.724
the competencies of our competitors.
Our alliance partner enables us to develop the
strategies needed to compete in the market 4.18 0.834 0.723
11
Our alliance partner enables us to understand the

needs of our customers better. 4.22 0.771 0.723
Our alliance partner helps us better understand the
market segments we serve. 4.11 0.859 0.690
Trust 0.860
Our alliance partner respect the confidentiality of the 4.46 0.638 0.790
information they receive from us.
Our alliance partner has been open and honest in 4.36 0.763 0.765
dealing with us.
We trust that our alliance partner’s decisions will be 4.29 0.738 0.745
beneficial to the alliance.
There is a high level of trust in the working 4.36 0.678 0.725
relationship with our alliance partner.
We can rely on our partner to abide by the alliance 4.39 0.657 0.723
agreement.
We trust that our partner’s decisions will be beneficial 4.14 0.869 0.579
to our hotel.
Mutual Commitment 0.828
Our alliance partners abide by agreements very well. 4.18 0.735 0.758
We have invested a lot of effort in our relationship 4.13 0.850 0.736
with alliance partners.
We and our alliance partners always try to keep each 4.34 0.686 0.706
other’s promises.
Our alliance partners have made sacrifices for us in 3.63 1.143 0.529
the past.
Learning Intent 0.854
As a result of this alliance, we have improved existing 3.04 1.277 0.882
technical skills
As a result of this alliance, we have developed new 3.28 1.281 0.861
management skills.
As a result of this alliance, we have developed new 3.21 1.253 0.812
technical skills.
Shared vision 0.823
We and our alliance partners have a similar 4.14 0.811 0.758
understanding about the aims and objectives of
the collaboration.
understanding about the importance of
collaboration.
understanding about the importance of
improvements that benefit the collaboration.
Communication 0.646
Our hotel and alliance partner frequently exchange 4.25 0.802 0.792
each other’s opinions
Our alliance partner frequently keeps us informed of 4.20 0.847 0.650
new developments
12
Knowledge Sharing 0.927

In order to develop competitive products or services, 4.05 0.882 0.846
our hotel creates and shares knowledge with
strategic alliance partners.
Our hotel regularly conducts meetings with strategic 3.96 0.984 0.811
alliance partners for the purpose of
communication and knowledge developing and
sharing.
Our hotel and strategic alliance partners create a 3.93 0.936 0.811
“community” that allows strategic alliance
members to share and create knowledge.
You and your partner share know-how from work 4.03 0.952 0.811
experience with each other
Our hotel and alliance partner learn from each other 3.87 1.014 0.802
sufficiently about business activities (distribution,
sales-marketing, service production, R & D, etc.)
Our hotel and alliance partner share knowledge
obtained from newspapers, magazines, journals, 3.96 0.956 0.794
television and other sources
Our hotel and alliance partner work together to 3.98 0.943 0.775
create new skills and knowledge.
Our hotel uses all its resources (financial, technical, 3.66 1.104 0.775
physical, administrative, people, etc.) to support
the sharing of knowledge.
Our hotel and alliance partner share significant 4.02 0.900 0.745
proportion of knowledge with each other.
Our hotel and alliance partner share each other’s 3.70 1.095 0.667
know-where and know-whom
Our hotel and alliance partner share a lot of 4.02 0.898 0.572
information about how to improve each other's
capacities.
Alliance based innovation 0.835
We routinely gather information about prospective 4.25 0.835 0.775
partners from various forums (e.g., trade shows,
industry conventions, databases, publication,
internet, etc.)
We actively monitor our environment to identify 4.18 0.848 0.770
partnering opportunities
We are alert to market developments that create 4.26 0.827 0.754
potential alliance opportunities
Our new products/services introduction has increased 3.55 0.994 0.709
after the collaboration
13
Internal Innovation 0.736

Our hotel frequently tries out new ideas 4.08 0.890 0.675
Our hotel is creative in its methods of operation 4.10 0.870 0.583
Our hotel is often the first to market with new 3.45 0.995 0.424
products and services
Innovation in our hotel is perceived as too risky and is 3.51 0.881 0.417
resisted (reverse)
Results
Table 3 reveals the sample’s profile.
Table 3. Sample Profiles of Hotels and Alliance Relations

Characteristics Frequency Percentage
Number of stars
4-star hotels 95 41.3
5-star hotels 135 58.7
Total 230 100
Position of ownership
Private/Independent 128 55.7
National chain 50 21.7
International chain 18 7.8
Partnership 27 11.7
Group company 7 3.0
Total 230 100
Hospitality Alliance types
Marketing alliance 130 56.5
Technology based alliance 26 11.3
Management contract 24 10.4
Franchise 18 7.8
Alliance with competitors 7 3.0
Alliance with suppliers 12 5.2
Joint venture 12 5.2
Other 1 0.4
Total 230 100
Industry of alliance partner
Travel 74 32.2
Food and beverage (e.g. restaurants) 6 2.6
Transportation 3 1.3
Accommodation 125 54.3
Entertainment 1 0.4
Organization 4 1.7
Rent a car 2 0.9
Spa wellness- Health 2 0.9
Logistic 1 0.4
Architecture 4 1.7
Information and Communication 3 1.3
Textile 2 0.9
Food (FMCG) 3 1.3
14
Duration of contract with alliance partner

Less than 1 year 33 14.3
1-5 years 127 55.2
6-10 years 36 15.7
More than 10 years 34 14.8
Alliance with other companies
Yes 222 96.5
No 7 3
Unanswered 1 0.5
Extranet to share information and data
Yes 160 69.4
No 70 30.6
Whether hotels have a service development unit
Yes 176 76.5
No 54 23.5
Total 230 100
Descriptive and Correlation Analysis

The means, standard deviations and bivariate Pearson correlations between the variables have been
found through the SPSS-Version 20 software (see Table 4). The respondents rated the trust variable
highest (mean=4.353), followed by communication (mean=4.233), absorptive capacity (mean=4.161),
shared vision (mean=4.146), commitment (mean=4.076), knowledge sharing (mean=3.977),
innovativeness (mean=3.895), and learning intent (mean=3.227). Moreover, the value of the standard
deviation of the majority of the constructs is less than 1.
Table 4. Means, standard deviations and cross-correlations

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. AC 4.161 0.68 1
2. Trust 4.353 0.56 0.499** 1
3. CMT 4.076 0.72 0.612** 0.558** 1
4. LI 3.227 1.14 0.273** 0.089 0.204** 1
5. SV 4.146 0.68 0.580** 0.549** 0.602** 0.213** 1
6. COM 4.233 0.71 0.527** 0.426** 0.445** 0.328** 0.428** 1
7. KS 3.977 0.74 0.622** 0.473** 0.565** 0.333** 0.544** 0.543** 1
8. INN 3.895 0.59 0.320** 0.219** 0.235** 0.323** 0.240** 0.240** 0.348** 1
Note: AC= Absorptive Capacity; CMT= Commitment; LI= Learning Intent; SV= Shared Vision; COM=
Communication; KS= Knowledge Sharing; INN= Innovativeness; ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-
tailed); Based on n=230
Besides, the bivariate Pearson Correlation with the help of correlation coefficient (r) demonstrates the
robustness of linear association and its plus (minus) sign shows the direction of relationship. The
results revealed that inter-organizational knowledge sharing process has positive and significant
relationship with inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers: absorptive capacity (r=0.622,
p=0.01) followed by commitment (r=0.565, p=0.01), shared vision (r=0.544, p=0.01), communication
(r=0.543, p=0.01), trust (r=0.473, p=0.01), and learning intent (r=0.333, p=0.01). In addition, the results
revealed that hotels alliances innovativeness has positive and significant relationship with inter-
organizational knowledge sharing process (r=0.348, p=0.01) followed by inter-organizational
knowledge sharing enablers: learning intent (r=0.323, p=0.01), absorptive capacity (r=0.320, p=0.01),
15
shared vision (r=0.240, p=0.01), communication (r=0.240, p=0.01), commitment (r=0.235, p=0.01), and
trust (r=0.219, p=0.01).
Hypotheses Testing
To prove mediation, Baron and Kenny (1986) provided that three preconditions must be applied:
Firstly, the independent variable-inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers: (a)
communication, (b) trust, (c) shared vision, (d) commitment, (e) learning, and (f) absorptive capacity
each should impact the mediator-inter-organizational knowledge sharing process-in the first
regression equation. Secondly, the independent variable-inter-organizational knowledge sharing
enablers: (a) communication, (b) trust, (c) shared vision, (d) commitment, (e) learning, and (f)
absorptive capacity each should be revealed to impact the dependent variable-innovative behavioural
outcome-in the second regression equation. Thirdly, the mediator inter-organizational knowledge
sharing process must influence the dependent variable-innovative behavioural outcome-in the third
regression equation. Baron and Kenny (1986) further provided that if these preconditions all hold on
to the predetermined path, then the influence of the independent variable on the dependent variable
should be lower in the third regression equation than in the second. Besides, perfect mediation
applies if the independent variable has no influence when the mediator is controlled.
Therefore, in the current study, by following the Baron and Kenny (1986), a four-step method in
which various regression analyses were performed and the significance of the beta coefficients was
studied at each stage. The basic aim of steps 1-3 was to ensure that without controlling or holding
constant any factor, whether zero-order significant correlation exists among study variables. As shown
in table 5, in step-1, the results of regressions from 3a to 3f showed that significant and positive
relationship exist between inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers and innovative
behavioural outcome (IBO): trust and IBO (β=0.357, p<0.001, R2=10.6%), followed by absorptive
capacity and IBO (β=0.339, p<0.001, R 2=11.5%), communication and IBO (β=0.273, p<0.001, R2=7.4%),
shared vision and IBO (β=0.357, p<0.262, R2=8.5% ), commitment and IBO (β=0.242, p<0.001,
R2=8.3%), and learning intent and IBO (β=0.160, p<0.001, R2=9.4%).
Besides, as shown in Table 5, in step 2, the results of regressions analyses from 2a to 2f showed that
significant and positive relationship exist between inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers
and inter-organizational knowledge sharing process (IKSP): absorptive capacity and IKSP (β=0.628,
p<0.001, R2=39.2%), followed by shared vision and IKSP (β=0.622, p<0.262, R2=38.5%), commitment
and IKSP (β=0.585, p<0.001, R2=34%), communication and IKSP (β=0.557, p<0.001, R2=30.7%), trust
and IKSP (β=0.511, p<0.001, R2=34%), and learning intent and IKSP (β=0.373, p<0.001, R2=13.5%).
Moreover, as shown in Table 5, in step-3, the result of regression-1 showed that significant and
positive relationship exists between inter-organizational knowledge sharing the process and
innovative behavioural outcome (β=0.459, p<0.001, R2=20.7%). Besides, R-square values vary
maximally to 11.5%, 39.2%, and 20.7% in step 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Keeping in view these significant
relationships from steps 1 through 3, hypotheses H1, H2a-f, and H3a-f all were accepted, hence
mediation was considered possible, and, therefore, the current study further proceeded to step 4.
Besides, as shown in Table 5, in 4th step of multiple regression model, when regressed on the
dependent variable-innovative behavioural outcome-, the independent variable-inter-organizational
knowledge sharing enablers (except learning) were no longer remained significant, when mediator
variable-inter-organizational knowledge sharing process was controlled (see Table 5, non-significant β
values ranges from 0.006 to 0.057). However, paths between inter-organizational knowledge sharing
process (IKSP) and innovative behavioural outcome (IBO) remained significant after controlling for
16
inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers: shared visionIKSPIBO (β=0.499, p<0.001,

R2=21.9%), followed by communicationIKSPIBO (β=0.477, p<0.001, R2=21.7%),
2
commitmentIKSPIBO (β=0.466, p<0.001, R =21.7%), trustIKSPIBO (β=0.438, p<0.001,
R2=21.6%), absorptive capacityIKSPIBO (β=0.436, p<0.001, R2=21.7%), and learning
intentIKSP IBO (β=0.401, p<0.001, R2=22.1%). These findings support the full mediation of inter-
organizational knowledge sharing process between inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers
(except learning intent) and innovative behavioural outcome. However, as shown in table 5, in the 4th
step of multiple regression model, inter-organizational knowledge sharing enabler-learning intent
remained significant (β=0.147, p<0.05) means that both independent-learning intent and mediator-
inter-organizational knowledge sharing process-variables significantly predict dependent variable-
innovative behavioural outcome. Thus, the finding supported partial mediation of inter-
organizational knowledge sharing process between inter-organizational knowledge sharing enabler-
learning intent and innovative behavioural outcome. Therefore, these results confirmed hypotheses
4a-f.
Table 5. Testing of Hypotheses

Step Regressions Relationships Path R-square Hypothesis
Coefficient (percent) Testing
Step 1 Regression-3a IKSC IBO 0.273** 7.4 H3a Accepted
Regression-3b IKST IBO 0.357** 10.6 H3b Accepted
Regression-3c IKSSV IBO 0.262** 8.5 H3c Accepted
Regression-3d IKSCT IBO 0.242** 8.3 H3d Accepted
Regression-3e IKSL IBO 0.160** 9.4 H3e Accepted
Regression-3f IKSAC IBO 0.339** 11.5 H3f Accepted
Step 2 Regression-2a IKSC IKSP 0.557** 30.7 H2a Accepted
Regression-2b IKST IKSP 0.511** 25.7 H2b Accepted
Regression-2c IKSSV IKSP 0.622** 38.5 H2c Accepted
Regression-2d IKSCT IKSP 0.585** 34.0 H2d Accepted
Regression-2e IKSL IKSP 0.373** 13.5 H2e Accepted
Regression-2f IKSAC IKSP 0.628** 39.2 H2f Accepted
Step 3 Regression-1 IKSP  IBO 0.459** 20.7 H1 Accepted
Step 4 Multiple IKSC IBO 0.006ns 21.7 H4a Accepted full
Regression-4a IKSCIKSP IBO 0.477** mediation
Multiple IKST IBO 0.060ns 21.6 H4b Accepted full
Regression-4b IKST IKSP IBO 0,438** mediation
Multiple IKSSV IBO 0.040ns 21.9 H4c Accepted full
Regression-4c IKSSVIKSPIBO 0.499** mediation
Multiple IKSCT IBO 0.011ns 21.7 H4d Accepted full
Regression-4d IKSCTIKSPIBO 0.466** mediation
Multiple IKSL IBO 0.147* 22.1 H4e Accepted
Regression-4e IKSLIKSPIBO 0.401** partial mediation
Multiple IKSAC IBO 0.057ns 21.7 H4f Accepted full
Regression-4f IKSACIKSPIBO 0.436** mediation
Note: IKSP=Interorganizational Knowledge Sharing Process, IBO=Innovative Behavioural Outcome, IKSC=
Interorganizational Knowledge Sharing Enabler: Communication, IKST= Interorganizational Knowledge Sharing
Enabler: Trust, IKSSV= Interorganizational Knowledge Sharing Enabler: Shared Vision, IKSCT= Interorganizational
Knowledge Sharing Enabler: Trust, IKSL= Interorganizational Knowledge Sharing Enabler: Learning Intent, IKSAC=
Interorganizational Knowledge Sharing Enabler: Absorptive Capacity, ns=Non Significant, *= p<0.05,**= p<0.001
17
Discussion and Conclusions

Altogether, the findings of the current study provided significant support for the logic that relational
and social capital facilitates alliance-based behavioural innovation, and this conclusion was more
robust indirectly than directly. The six facets of relational and social capital inter-organizational
knowledge sharing enablers offered and examined-shared vision, communication, commitment, trust,
absorptive capacity, and learning intent-have significant impacts, directly and indirectly through
inter-organizational knowledge sharing process, on the innovative behavioural outcome of hospitality
alliance firms. These results implied that the degree of knowledge shared among hospitality alliance
partners could act as a mediator in the relation between different constructs of relational or social
capital facets and behavioural innovative outcome. Specifically, hospitality alliance partners in high
relational or social atmosphere of goodwill trust, shared understanding, disposition to share
information, commitment to investments in relation-specific or complementary resources, having
learning intention, and prior related knowledge or absorptive capacity can generate innovative rents
by building up their purposefully superior regular form of inter-organizational knowledge-sharing
processes. Thus, social capital facets along with the capability of a firm to identify the worth of novel,
outside knowledge, integrate it and put on to commercial ends assists the creation of new knowledge
in terms of its accessibility, combination, and exchanging to generate innovations.
Besides, these results confirm the mediating role of knowledge sharing behaviour between social
capital and innovation of cultural tourism clusters organizations (CTCs) proved in the study of
Martinez-Pérez et al. (2016) which considered both the exploring and exploiting knowledge sharing
behaviour as an explanatory mechanism that link the social capital with the advancement of
innovation in tourism and hospitality firms. Thus, hospitality alliances firms that are competent to
formulate an ambidextrous knowledge strategy by making-capital of their social networks in a
complementary means are also more predictable to be innovators. Moreover, the current study also
found the partial mediation of knowledge sharing behaviour between knowledge sharing enabler-
learning intent-and innovative behavioural outcome of hospitality alliance firms. This implied that
both learning intent and knowledge sharing behaviour are equally important in generating innovative
behaviour of hospitality firms. These findings are in accordance with previous results of Kim et al.
(2013) which indicated that hotel employees’ learning goal orientation has a positive impact on their
knowledge-sharing behaviours, which in turn impact positively on their service innovative behaviour.
The findings of current study specifically endorse the basic propositions of relational view and social
capital that (a) networks of relationships are an invaluable asset (i.e., capital-strong ties, trust, shared
goal) to acquire knowledge and innovation (Inkpen & Tsang, 2005, p.150-151), and (b) relational rents-
supernormal profit-are feasible when alliance firms combine, exchange, or commit relation-specific
complementary resources and capabilities, knowledge sharing practices-absorptive capacity,
transparency and lack of free riding, and trust-based governance methods that reduce transaction
costs or enable leveraging of rents by the synergistic blend of resources, and capabilities or knowledge
(Dyer & Singh, 1998, p. 662).
In conclusion, these results implied that intensity around knowledge-based relational and
collaborative models of innovation (e.g., service-dominant paradigm - Vargo & Lusch, 2004; open
innovation - Chesbrough, 2003) in terms of knowledge sharing that manifests while collaborating with
alliances partners to generate innovation is penetrating over hospitality and tourism sectors, where
stiff competition induces collaborative innovation and marketing an important prerequisite for
survival of hospitality organizations and destinations.
Theoretical Contribution
18
The current study augments the current cultural and creative industry research on knowledge sharing
(Kim et al., 2013; Martínez-Pérez et al., 2016; Zach & Hill, 2017; Kim & Shim, 2017; García-Villaverde et
al., 2017; Liu, 2018) by integrating relational view (Dyer & Singh, 1998) and social capital theory
(Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998) with knowledge-based view (Kogut & Zander, 1992) of collaborative
innovation (Schumpeter, 1934) as a comprehensive model. The conceptual framework offered in the
current research investigates the interplay between different facets of relational and social capital,
with inter-organizational knowledge sharing process and innovative behaviour in a fast-changing
global environment of the hospitality and tourism sector. The findings demonstrate that distinct
facets of relational and social capital are vital accelerators and significantly contribute towards inter-
firm knowledge sharing; therefore, impacting innovative behaviour of hospitality alliance firms
positively. Further, inter-organizational knowledge sharing behaviour can perform an intermediary
mechanism between social capital and relational constructs and innovative behaviour of hospitality
firms of alliance networks (Liu, 2018).
Besides, by establishing inter-firm knowledge sharing as a basis of collaborative innovation in

strategic hospitality alliances, the current study contributes towards the extension of resource-based
perspective as put forth in the learning and knowledge-based views of the organization (Grant, 1996;
Kogut & Zander, 1992). More specifically, the current research, theoretically and empirically
establishes that an alliances relational and social capital’ constructs trigger alliance partner’ innovative
behaviour through inter-firm knowledge sharing in the context of strategic hospitality alliances.
Therefore, hospitality alliance firms that benefit from relational and social capital knowledge-based
resources of alliance firms can develop effective knowledge management and engender further
innovation. To our knowledge, there are limited research concentrating on inter-organizational
knowledge sharing behaviour and its relationship with the relational and social aspects as precursors
to collaborative innovation within the context of hospitality alliances of national and international
branded 4- and 5-star hotels. Thus, the current study adds to the theoretical connection of the
relational view, social Capital theory through the knowledge-based view of collaborative innovation,
especially within the context of hospitality alliances.
Besides, one more contribution of current research is the analysis of determinants of innovation in
under-researched sector i.e., cultural destinations. Besides, the current research produces the factual
recognition of historic cities of Turkey as cultural destinations, so emphasizing the appropriateness of
world heritage cities as a symbol of cultural identity, heritage and sense of belonging to investigate
interfirm relationships across hospitality alliance firms having diverse relationships, origin, and strong
global competition (Liu, 2018).
Finally, the findings portray the significance convergence of strategic management and
entrepreneurship by suggesting that hospitality firms through strategic alliances may generate value
by offering collaborative innovative experience to the customers. As such, entrepreneurship literature
underscores the value of capitalizing external knowledge-based resources and creating new
combinations through relational and social capital by 4 and 5 star hotels operating in cultural
hospitality and tourism alliances.
Practical Contribution
Keeping in view the importance, challenges, and growth offered by the increasingly sharing and
networked-based economy, the findings of the current study imply that the Traveling and Tourism
(T&T) industry of Turkey in its policy agenda should recognize that relational and social capital-
communication, trust, shared vision, commitment, absorptive capacity, and learning intent-based
19
knowledge sharing hospitality strategic alliances can be a vital foundation of innovativeness.

Especially, the senior executives of national and international 4 and 5-star certified Turkish hotels
should consider these relational assets as significant within the context of hospitality and tourism
domains where diverse players participate in marketing, innovation, and management of tourism
destinations and offerings. However, to materialize the agenda of innovation, partnerships, and
sharing, the hospitality industry especially of Turkey with their new business models will have to
orchestrate the collaborative relationships, networks carefully, and knowledge sharing processes, to
further offer innovative and varied local hospitality experiences of Turkish based world heritage
destinations that are particularly redolent of their local culture. In other words, the leveraging of
collaborative innovation through the synergistic combination of knowledge-based resources is feasible
only when partners in Turkish based hospitality strategic alliances are ready to combine, exchange, or
commit relation-specific complementary capabilities and resources, knowledge sharing practices-
absorptive capacity, transparency, and trust-based governance mechanisms. Hence, for hospitality
industry, collaborative innovation is an effective approach only provided the conditions in recognizing
the requisite knowledge-based commercial, cultural, operational, and strategic synergies in creating
alliances with diverse external allies.
Limitations and further research

Although the current study has advanced to the understanding of how knowledge-based relational
and social capital resources act to enhance the innovation performance of hospitality alliance firms
directly and indirectly through inter-organizational knowledge sharing behaviour, however, some
limitations also exist. One of these is the generalization of its findings. As previously discussed, the
sample of this study only consists of 4 and 5 star national and international hotels operating in
cultural cities of Istanbul and Antalya, while hotels with other star ratings with different locations as
well contexts in terms of users/customers, SMEs, policies, practices, social media, emerging
technologies, and e-tourism are all critical to the phenomena of collaborative innovation. Therefore,
keeping in view the heterogeneity in hospitality firms having different traits, the results may be
generalized accordingly. However, the findings can be conjectured to the breadth of the current
research population. Subsequently, the current research framework can be applied to another type of
collaborative relationships and referred contexts to make a comparative research between them
(Nieves, Quintana, & Osorio, 2014).
Finally, although structural equation modeling (SEM) offers justifications identical to multiple
regression, still, variances exist. Since SEM has a distinctive capacity to investigate several dependence
paths simultaneously. Moreover, the application of SEM to investigate strategic management issues
has amplified dramatically in recent years, so the current research model can be examined with SEM
approach to produce more robust findings (Shook, Ketchen, Hult, & Kacmar, 2004).
References
Acharya, A. S., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., & Nigam, A. (2013). Sampling: Why and how of it. Indian
Journal of Medical Specialties, 4(2), 330-333.
Asheim, B. T., Boschma, R., & Cooke, P. (2011). Constructing regional advantage: Platform Policies
based on related variety and differentiated knowledge bases. Regional Studies, 45(7), 893–904.
Barile, S., Ciasullo, M. V., Troisi, O., & Sarno, D. (2017). The role of technology and institutions in
tourism service ecosystems: Findings from a case study. The TQM Journal, 29(6), 811-833.
Baron, R. M. and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social
Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
20
Beaumont, N., & Dredge, D. (2010). Local tourism governance: A comparison of three network
approaches. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18, 7-28.
Beritelli, P. (2011). Do actors really agree on strategic issues? Applying consensus analysis of
stakeholder perceptions in tourist destination communities. Tourism Analysis, 16(3), 219-241.
Brislin, R.W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In Triandis,
H.C.and Berry, J.W. (Eds). Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology: Methodology. Allyn &Bacon,
Boston, MA, 389-444.
Camisón, C., Boronat-Navarro, M., & Forés, B. (2018). The interplay between firms’ internal and
external capabilities in exploration and exploitation. Management Decision. 56(7), 1559-1580.
Capaldo, A., & Petruzzelli, A. M. (2014). Partner geographic and organizational proximity and the
innovative performance of knowledge‐creating alliances. European Management Review, 11(1), 63-
84.
Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R., & Reiter‐Palmon, R. (2013). Leadership, creative problem‐solving capacity,
and creative performance: The importance of knowledge sharing. Human Resource
Management, 52(1), 95-121.
Chathoth, P. K., & Olsen, M. D. (2003). Strategic alliances: a hospitality industry perspective.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 22(4), 419-434.
Chen, C-J. (2004). The Effects of Knowledge Attribute, Alliance Characteristics, and Absorptive
Capacity on Knowledge Transfer Performance. R&D Management, 34(3), 311-321.
Chen, M. H., Wang, H. Y., & Wang, M. C. (2018). Knowledge sharing, social capital, and financial
performance: the perspectives of innovation strategy in technological clusters. Knowledge
Management Research & Practice, 16(1), 89-104.
Chen, Y. H., Lin, T. P., & Yen, D. C. (2014). How to facilitate inter-organizational knowledge sharing:
The impact of trust. Information & Management, 51(5), 568-578.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). The logic of open innovation: managing intellectual property. California
Management Review, 45(3), 33-58.
Chesbrough, H. (2017). The Future of Open Innovation: IRI Medal Address The future of open
innovation will be more extensive, more collaborative, and more engaged with a wider variety of
participants. Research-Technology Management, 60(6), 29-35.
Chesbrough, H., & Bogers, M. (2014). Explicating open innovation: Clarifying an emerging paradigm
for understanding innovation. In H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.). New
frontiers in open innovation (pp. 3-28), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cochran, W. G. (1963). Sampling techniques. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Second Edition.
Denicolai, S., Cioccarelli, G., & Zucchella, A. (2010). Resource-based local development and networked
core-competencies for tourism excellence. Tourism Management, 31(2), 260-266.
Drucker, P. F. (1993). The rise of the knowledge society. Wilson Quarterly, 17(2), 52-71.
Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of
marketing, 51(2), 11-27.
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of
interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660-679.
Easterby‐Smith, M., Lyles, M. A., & Tsang, E. W. (2008). Inter‐organizational knowledge transfer:
Current themes and prospects. Journal of management studies, 45(4), 677-690.
Elche, D., Martínez-Pérez, Á. & García-Villaverde, P. M. (2017). Inter-Organizational Relationships,
Knowledge Strategy and Innovation in Clusters of Cultural Tourism. Investigaciones Regionales,
(39), 17-37.
Ernst Young (2017), Tourism Industry Oversea. Retrieved from.www.ey.com/Publication/.../EY.../ey-
greater-los-angeles-hospitality-trends.PDF
21
García-Villaverde, P. M., Elche, D., Martínez-Pérez, Á. & Ruiz-Hortega, M. J. (2017). Determinants of

radical innovation in clustered firms of the hospitality and tourism industry. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 61, 45-58.
Gomezelj, D. O. (2016). A systematic review of research on innovation in hospitality and tourism.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(3), 516-558.
Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability
coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing,
and Community Education.
Granovetter, M. (2005). The impact of social structure on economic outcomes. Journal of economic
perspectives, 19(1), 33-50.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm. Strategic management
journal, 17(S2), 109-122.
Grant, R. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. (2000). Knowledge and economic organization: an application to the
analysis of interfirm collaboration. In Knowledge Creation (pp. 113-150). Palgrave Macmillan,
London.
Greer, C. R., Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2016). A service perspective. Organizational Dynamics, 1(45),
28-38.
Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm
capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic management journal, 20(5), 397-420.
Gundlach, G. T., Achrol, R. S., & Mentzer, J. T. (1995). The structure of commitment in exchange. The
Journal of Marketing, 59(1), 78-92.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis.
Vol. 5, No 3. Uppersaddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
Hall, C.M. (1999). Rethinking collaboration and partnership: A public policy perspective. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 7(3–4): 274–289
Hamel, G. (1991). Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic
alliances. Strategic management journal, 12(S1), 83-103.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across
organization subunits. Administrative science quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
Hassan, M., & Ayub, A. (2019). Women’s experience of perceived uncertainty: insights from emotional
intelligence. Gender in Management: An International Journal, doi.org/10.1108/GM-02-2019-0016.
Hjalager, A.-M. (2010a). A review of innovation research in tourism. Tourism Management, 31(1), 1–12.
Hjalager, A.-M. (2010b). Regional innovation systems: The case of angling tourism. Tourism
Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 12(2), 192-216
Hu, M. L. M., Horng, J. S., & Sun, Y. H. C. (2009). Hospitality teams: Knowledge sharing and service
innovation performance. Tourism management, 30(1), 41-50.
Hurt, H. T., Katherine J and Chester, D. C. (1977). Scales for the Measurement of Innovativeness.
Human Communication Research, 1(1), 58-65.
Idrees, I. A., Vasconcelos, A. C., & Ellis, D. (2018). Clique and elite: inter-organizational knowledge
sharing across five-star hotels in the Saudi Arabian religious tourism and hospitality industry.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(6), 1358-1378.
Inkpen, A. C. (1992). Learning and collaboration: An examination of North American-Japanese joint
ventures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Western Ontario
Inkpen, A. C. (1997). An examination of knowledge management in international joint ventures. In
P.W. Beamish and P. J. Killing (Eds.), Cooperative Strategies: North-American perspective (pp.
337-369). San Francisco: The New Lexington.
Inkpen, A. C. (1998). Learning and knowledge acquisition through international strategic
alliances. The Academy of Management Executive, 12(4), 69-80.
22
Inkpen, A. C. (2000). Learning through joint ventures: a framework of knowledge acquisition. Journal
of management studies, 37(7), 1019-1044.
Inkpen, A. C., & Crossan, M. M. (1995). Believing is seeing: Joint ventures and organization
learning. Journal of management Studies, 32(5), 595-618.
Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of
management review, 30(1), 146-165.
Investment support and promotion agency of Turkey (2018). Invest in Turkey. Retrieved from
http://www.invest.gov.tr/en-US/sectors/Pages/WellnessAndTourism.aspx
Jamal TB & Getz D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism
Research, 22(1), 186–204
Jetter, L. G., & Chen, R. J. (2012). An exploratory investigation of knowledge sharing and cooperative
marketing in tourism alliances. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Administration, 13(2), 131-144.
Kale, P., Singh, H. & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and Protection of Proprietary Assets in Strategic
Alliances: Building Relational Capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 217-237
Kim, N., & Shim, C. (2017). Taking it personally: How to increase interorganizational knowledge
sharing in a tourist district. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 19(1), 85-97.
Kim, T., Lee, G., Paek, S., & Lee, S. (2013). Social capital, knowledge sharing and organizational
performance: what structural relationship do they have in hotels? International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(5), 683-704.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication
of technology. Organization Science, 3, 383-397.
Koo, C., Ricci, F., Cobanoglu, C., & Okumus, F. (2017). Special issue on smart, connected hospitality
and tourism. Information Systems Frontiers, 19(4), 699-703.
Köseoglu, M. A., Yazici, S., & Okumus, F. (2017). Barriers to the implementation of strategic decisions:
evidence from hotels in a developing country. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 1-
30.
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational
learning. Strategic management journal, 461-477.
Levitt, B., & March, J. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Reviews, 14, 319-340
Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. New York: Archives of Psychology.
Li, C. H., & Chang, C. M. (2016). The influence of trust and perceived playfulness on the relationship
commitment of hospitality online social network-moderating effects of gender. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(5), 924-944.
Liu, C. H. S. (2018). Examining social capital, organizational learning and knowledge transfer in
cultural and creative industries of practice. Tourism Management, 64, 258-270.
Maggioni, I., Marcoz, E. M. And Mauri, C. (2014). Segmenting networking orientation in the
hospitality industry: an empirical research on service bundling. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 42, 192-201.
Martínez-Pérez, Á. García-Villaverde, P. M., Elche, D. (2016). The mediating effect of ambidextrous
knowledge strategy between social capital and innovation of cultural tourism clusters firms.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(7), 1484-1507
Merlo, O., Bell, S. J., Mengüç, B., & Whitwell, G. J. (2006). Social capital, customer service orientation
and creativity in retail stores. Journal of Business Research, 59(12), 1214-1221.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2007) Tourism Strategy of Turkey-2023. Retrieved from
www.kultur.gov.tr/EN,138780/tourism-strategy-of-turkey.html
Molina‐Morales, F. X., & Martínez‐Fernández, M. T. (2010). Social networks: effects of social capital on
firm innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(2), 258-279.
23
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. The
journal of marketing, 20-38.
Nahapiet J, Ghoshal S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage.
Academy of Management Review, 23, 242-266
Nieves, J., & Osorio, J. (2013). The role of social networks in knowledge creation. Knowledge
Management Research & Practice, 11(1), 62-77.
Nieves, J., Quintana, A., & Osorio, J. (2014). Knowledge-based resources and innovation in the hotel
industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 38, 65-73.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5, 14-
37.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create
the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford university press.
Norman, P. M. (2004). Knowledge acquisition, knowledge loss, and satisfaction in high technology
alliances. Journal of Business Research, 57(6), 610-619.
OECD/Eurostat. (2005). Oslo Manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data (3rd
ed.). Paris: OECD Publishing.
Okumus, F. (2013). Facilitating knowledge management through information technology in hospitality
organizations. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 4(1), 64-80.
Okumus, F., Altinay, L., & Chathoth, P. (2010). Strategic Management in the International Hospitality
and Tourism Industry. London: Routledge.
Ottenbacher, M., & Gnoth, J. (2005). How to develop successful hospitality innovation. Cornell Hotel
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 46(2), 205-222.
Pace, L. A. (2016). How do tourism firms innovate for sustainable energy consumption? A capabilities
perspective on the adoption of energy efficiency in tourism accommodation
establishments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 111, 409-420.
Peltokorpi, V. (2017). Absorptive capacity in foreign subsidiaries: The effects of language-sensitive
recruitment, language training, and interunit knowledge transfer. International Business
Review, 26(1), 119-129.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence
approach. NY: Harper and Row Publishers.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co‐creation experiences: The next practice in value
creation. Journal of interactive marketing, 18(3), 5-14.
Provan K. G. (1983). The federation as an interorganizational linkage network. Academy of
Management Review, 8: 79–89.
Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion
and range. Administrative science quarterly, 48(2), 240-267.
Rodríguez-Díaz, M., & Espino-Rodríguez, T. F. (2006). Developing relational capabilities in hotels.
Saraniemim, S., & Kylanen, M. (2011). Problematizing the concept of tourism destination: An analysis
of different theoretical approaches. Journal of Travel Research, 50(2), 133-143
Schumpeter, J.A., (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Serrat, O. (2017). Learning in strategic alliances. In Knowledge Solutions (pp. 639-647). Singapore:
Springer.
Shaw G & Williams A. (2009). Knowledge transfer and management in tourism organisations: An
emerging research agenda. Tourism Management, 30(3), 325-335.
Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. M., & Kacmar, K. M. (2004). An assessment of the use of
structural equation modeling in strategic management research. Strategic management
journal, 25(4), 397-404.
24
Tang, T. W. (2016). Making innovation happen through building social capital and scanning
environment. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 56, 56-65.
Tang, T. W., Wang, M. C. H., & Tang, Y. Y. (2015). Developing service innovation capability in the
hotel industry. Service Business, 9(1), 97-113.
Tzokas, N., Kim, Y. A., Akbar, H., & Al-Dajani, H. (2015). Absorptive capacity and performance: The
role of customer relationship and technological capabilities in high-tech SMEs. Industrial
Marketing Management, 47, 134-142.
UNWTO (2018). Tourism and the Sustainable Development Goals–Journey to 2030 HIGHLIGHTS.
Retrieved from https://www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf/10.18111/9789284419401 dated 4.3.2018
Van Niekerk, M., De Martino, M., & Scott, N. (2017). Introduction: Tourism Knowledge Transfer. In
Knowledge Transfer to and within Tourism: Academic, Industry and Government Bridges (pp. 3-9).
UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of
marketing, 68(1), 1-17.
Von Friedrichs Grängsjö, Y., & Gummesson, E. (2006). Hotel networks and social capital in destination
marketing. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 17(1), 58-75.
Wang, Y., & Xiang, Z. (2007). Toward a theoretical framework of collaborative destination
marketing. Journal of Travel Research, 46(1), 75-85.
Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free
Press.
Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for
novices. Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care (JEPHC), 8(3). 1-13.
World Economic Forum. (2017). The travel and tourism competitiveness report. Retrieved from
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TTCR_2017_web_0401.pdf
Yang, J.-T. And Wan, C.S. (2004). Advancing organizational effectiveness and knowledge management
implementation. Tourism Management, 25(5), 593-601.
Yli‐Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge
exploitation in young technology‐based firms. Strategic management journal, 22(6‐7), 587-613.
Zach, F. (2016). Collaboration for innovation in tourism organizations: leadership support, innovation
formality, and communication. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 40(3), 271-290.
Zach, F. J., & Hill, T. L. (2017). Network, knowledge and relationship impacts on innovation in tourism
destinations. Tourism Management, 62, 196-207.
Coordinating editor: Martina Gonzalez-Gallarza
25
An exploratory and qualitative study on the meaning of
transformative tourism and its facilitators and inhibitors
Jessica Mei Pung 1* and Giacomo Del Chiappa 2
1
Department of Economics and Business, University of Cagliari, Via Sant'Ignazio, 74, 09123 Cagliari, Italy. Email:
jm.pung@unica.it
2 Department of Economics and Business, University of Sassari, Via Muroni, 25, 07100 Sassari, Italy. Phone: +39
(079) 20 17 313. School of Tourism & Hospitality, University of Johannesburg, South Africa. Email:
gdelchiappa@uniss.it
Abstract
While transformative tourism may represent a timely form of tourism conveying hope in an ever-changing world,
there is still limited research adopting a demand-side perspective and exploring the understanding and experiences
that tourists have about transformative tourism. This paper contributes to fill this research gap by analysing
transformative tourism experiences and investigating its characteristics, especially the aspects that facilitate and
inhibit tourist transformation. Adopting a qualitative semi-structured interview approach, data was also collected
on the nature of wellbeing experienced as result of tourism and how former travellers perceived the impact of
transformation in daily life after their return. Overall, interviewees primarily viewed subjective tourist
transformation as achieving greater self-efficacy, humility and personal enrichment. Findings suggest that
transformation facilitators correspond to: interacting with locals and travellers, facing challenges, experiencing the
sense of the place, long stays and post-travel reflection; while several aspects emerged as transformation inhibitors,
such as short stays, repeated activities, familiar travel companions and the lack of access to the residents’ lifestyle.
Participants reported experiencing eudaimonic wellbeing, rather than happiness and hedonia, and discussed the
long-lasting effects of their tourist transformation. Managerial and marketing implications are provided, as well as
future directions for transformative tourism research.
Keywords: transformative tourism, transformation, tourist experience, wellbeing, facilitators, inhibitors
Citation: Pung, J.M. & Del Chiappa, G. (2020). An exploratory and qualitative study on the meaning of
transformative tourism and its facilitators and inhibitors. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2404.

RESEARCH PAPER 1
An exploratory and qualitative study on the meaning of transformative tourism and its facilitators and inhibitors
Introduction
Ever-increasing mobility and migration have now a major role in allowing for more cross-cultural
interaction (EU, 2019), revealing the need for travellers to develop tools to understand different
perspectives and values across the world. Transformative tourism, as form of tourism leading to
“positive change in attitudes and values among those who participate in the tourist experience” (Christie
& Mason, 2003, p. 9), may represent a timely vehicle of hope for expanding people’s worldview and
conveying a greater sense of inclusiveness and belonging to the world (Pritchard et al., 2011).
So far, research has mainly focused on studying the transformative power of specific types of tourism,
namely: backpacking (Noy, 2004; Hottola, 2004; Kanning, 2013; Matthews, 2014); Couchsurfing (Decrop
et al., 2018); dark tourism (Magee & Gilmore, 2015); extreme sports and survival escapist travel
(Reisinger, 2013); folklore tourism (Everett & Parakoottathil, 2016); gap year travel (O’Reilly, 2006);
international sojourns (Milstein, 2005; Fordham, 2006; Brown, 2009; Erichsen, 2011; Grabowski et al.,
2017); retreat centres visitation (Heintzmann, 2013; Fu et al., 2015); river rafting (Arnould & Price, 1993);
tourism in protected areas (Wolf et al., 2017); volunteer tourism (Coghlan & Gooch, 2010; Coghlan &
Weiler, 2018); wellness tourism (Voigt et al., 2011; Smith, 2013); and WWOOFing (Deville & Wearing,
2013). However, very few studies have been devoted to analyse how transformative tourism experiences
are characterised, regardless of tourism type, and provided in-depth information about transformative
processes occurring in tourism experiences. Therefore, more research is needed to further understand
what characterises transformative tourism.
This paper adopts a qualitative approach and in the exploration of transformative tourism experiences,
it also takes into consideration the role and nature of wellbeing, thus responding to Filep and Laing
(2019)’s call for investigating the eudaimonic nature of tourist experiences. While existing literature on
tourism wellbeing has identified life-changing and long stays as experiences leading to increased tourist
quality of life (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Neal et al., 2007; Nawijn et al., 2010; Uysal et al., 2016), no study
has identified which aspects may facilitate tourist transformation across different types of tourism, as
well as those that inhibit it (Reisinger, 2013; Lean et al., 2014). Thus, the purpose of this study is to
examine subjective transformative tourism experiences, with a focus on exploring which characteristics
initiate tourist transformation (facilitators) and which aspects hinder transformative change
(inhibitors).
Literature Review
Transformative tourism and tourist wellbeing
In recent years, experience economy, which aims to produce memorable and personalised experiences
as whole products (Pine & Gilmore, 1998), has also influenced the tourism sector, underlining the
importance tourists assign to immersive and unique experiences (Boswijk et al., 2013). This suggests
that tourists as consumers collaborate with operators and suppliers in creating authentic stays and
developing meaningful relations in the destination to obtain self-fulfilment (Boswijk et al., 2013;
Tussyadiah, 2014; Decrop et al., 2018). As self-fulfilment is now emerging as the primary drive for
consumers in selecting and consuming products and experiences, transformative service research has
emerged as research strand in the field of marketing and consumer behaviour focusing on
transformative services, which have the objective of changing consumers and making improvements to
the individual and community wellbeing (Anderson et al., 2013; Anderson & Ostrom, 2015; Blocker &
Barrios, 2015; Mende & van Doorn, 2014).
In tourism research, Reisinger (2013) has delved into the connection between tourism and
transformational learning, defining travel experiences as journeys of the mind, leading to a greater
2
Pung & Del Chiappa (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2404
concern for humanity and the environment. In fact, in conceptualising transformative tourism
meanings, it is sociologist Jack Mezirow’s transformational learning theory (1978, 1991) that has mainly
been employed by the existing literature (Morgan, 2010; Coghlan & Gooch, 2010; Lean, 2012; Robledo &
Batle, 2017; Wolf et al., 2017; Coghlan & Weiler, 2018; Decrop et al., 2018). Transformative learning theory
defines transformation as an adult learning process of several steps, initiated by a “disorienting
dilemma” challenging established beliefs, and resulting in integrating new perspectives into increased
self-awareness (Mezirow, 1991, pp. 168-169).
In tourism experiences, transformative learning is believed to occur in the shape of confronting

challenges, which intensify an introspective process leading to greater self-understanding (Desforges,
2000; Noy, 2004; Kirillova et al., 2016; Coghlan & Weiler, 2018). New skills and new knowledge are also
cultivated during the trip, increasing the tourist’s autonomy and self-efficacy (Wearing, 2001; Brown,
2009; Gnoth & Matteucci, 2014; Kakoudakis et al., 2017). In the destination, intercultural competency
and cross-cultural awareness may also be developed (Taylor, 1994; Hottola, 2004; Brown, 2009; Mkono,
2016), corresponding to the tourist’s acceptance and adaptation to different values and practices,
potentially facilitating the tourist’s change in perspective and integration of new meanings to daily life
and interpersonal relationships after the trip (Taylor, 1994; Brown, 2009; Erichsen, 2011; Lean, 2012;
Grabowski et al., 2017; Decrop et al., 2018).
Transformative learning is believed to ultimately influence and change the tourists’ behaviour after their
return home (Coghlan & Weiler, 2018). For example, a different professional attitude may be adopted,
such as changing career prospects and the way relationships in the workplace are managed (Inkson &
Meyers, 2003; O’Reilly, 2006; Brown, 2009). Furthermore, the adoption of responsible behaviour
towards environmental and social issues may take place as a result of the interpretation of tourism
attractions and ecotourism programmes (Weaver, 2005; Zahra & McIntosh, 2007; Moscardo, 2017). The
transformative tourism meanings built from previous literature and so far discussed, could be perceived
as self-flourishing and may positively influence the tourists’ wellbeing, making tourist wellbeing a
potential outcome of tourist transformation.
In tourism research, tourist wellbeing has been examined from different perspectives. Studies on quality
of life have analysed the importance of tourism in influencing overall life satisfaction (e.g. Neal et al.,
1999; Richards, 1999; McCabe et al., 2010; Dolnicar et al., 2013; Eusebio & Carneiro, 2014). Tourism as
dimension contributing to life satisfaction was found to hold varying relevance according to individuals,
as well as within homogeneous segments of travellers (Dolnicar et al., 2013; Eusebio & Carneiro, 2014).
In comparing holiday and non-holiday takers, Gilbert and Abdullah (2004) and Nawijn et al. (2010) have
found that holiday takers experience greater wellbeing in the antecedent phase of the trip. Further, Neal
et al. (2007) argue that long stays are more beneficial to the positive relationship between satisfaction
with tourism services and satisfaction with leisure life. Holidays are also believed to provide a wide
range of experiences: Uysal et al. (2016) distinguish hedonic and life-changing experiences, in the
respectively short and long-term effect they have on the tourists’ quality of life.
Tourist happiness has also been conceptualised in terms of subjective wellbeing (Gilbert & Abdullah,
2004), a combination of measures of affect and satisfaction with life domains and life in general (Diener
et al., 1999, p. 277). However, the use of subjective wellbeing scales to measure tourist happiness has
been criticised by Filep and Deery (2010) and Filep (2014), as such scales fail to analyse the narratives
and depth of the tourists’ narratives and meanings emerging from their subjective experiences. While
tourism experiences are considered hedonic as they provide pleasure and enjoyment, the role of
eudaimonia (i.e. self-development and personal growth) in the tourist experience and wellbeing has yet
3
to be deeply examined (Filep & Laing, 2019). As opposed to only experiencing pleasure, eudaimonic
wellbeing as personal growth and flourishing also involves introspective questioning and uncomfortable
situations (Ryan & Deci, 2001; Keyes & Annas, 2009; Pyke et al., 2016). Adopting a eudaimonic approach,
negative affect, challenges and constraints experienced during the trip require further examination to
explore their role in the tourist transformation and wellbeing.
Since existing literature supports that the benefits gained from tourism are not permanent (Salazar,
2004; Lean, 2009; Moscardo, 2009), additional research should also be dedicated to explore whether
and how transformation through tourism is perceived by individuals in the long term (Kirillova et al.,
2016).
Transformation facilitators and inhibitors

While most research on transformative tourism has focused on selected types of tourism and explored
their specific transformative processes, Kirillova et al. (2016, 2017) investigated what ‘triggers’
transformative tourism experiences. In their studies, it was found that peak experiences initiate a
tourist’s existential transformation (Kirillova et al., 2016, 2017). Peak episodes have been described as
sudden and meaningful events occurring towards the end of the trip, and characterised by intense
emotions and a sense of precariousness, transcendence and connection with nature or a divine figure
(McDonald et al., 2009; Kirillova et al., 2017). In the form of an epiphany, peak episodes were found to
trigger a major life re-evaluation and the adoption of what the individual considered a more authentic
lifestyle and existence (Kirillova et al., 2016, 2017). Beyond identifying peak episodes as triggers of
existential transformation, no other transformative tourism study has investigated what may facilitate
and what may inhibit tourist transformation. Building on literature exploring tourist attitude change,
learning and spiritual experiences, two potential facilitators are also considered in this review:
interaction with locals and the sense of place.
While discovering the destination, visitors may perceive a sense of difference and distance between the
host culture and theirs (Taylor, 1994). This could lead to a ‘cultural disequilibrium’, leaving the tourist
frustrated while negotiating values and practices that differ from his/her views and behaviour (Taylor,
1994). As Fan et al. (2017) note, social contact with locals may have a positive effect on the tourist’s
perception of cultural distance, as increased social and service-oriented interactions with residents were
found to reduce the tourist’s cultural shock in the destination. Social interaction between tourists and
residents, now also intensified by the advent of sharing economy (e.g. Decrop et al., 2018), is an
important factor, not only in reducing the tourist’s cultural shock but also in causing attitude change
towards the destination (Pizam et al., 1991; Nyaupane et al., 2008). This is further supported by Roberson
(2003), who found that interactions with locals, rather than travel companions, contributed to the
learning experience of senior travellers. As such, being exposed to the destination residents’ lifestyle
contributes to self-discovery, cultural learning, and to changing perception of the world and shared
values (Adler, 1975; Yu & Lee, 2014). As a result, experiences where visitors have close encounters with
locals, have conversations about their stories, and acquire knowledge about their life and practices, are
believed to have a great influence in tourist transformation (Milman et al., 1990; Lean, 2009).
Sense of place is also believed to facilitate tourist transformation, as a combination of people, places
and landscapes that have physical, functional, affective and existential meaning (Morgan, 2010). Because
of the liminoid nature of tourism as extra-ordinary dimension outside everyday life, the destination
represents a source of difference, where self-exploration is intensified and existential authenticity can
be achieved (Turner, 1969; Andrews, 2009; Pearce, 2010; Brown, 2013; Kirillova et al., 2016; Wearing et
al., 2016; Kontogeorgopoulos, 2017). The destination has also been described as place constructed by
4
both the tourists’ and locals’ consumption through dialogical and embodied performances (Rakić &
Chambers, 2012), where tourists have the opportunity to have different roles and relationships, and
discover the spectacular and everyday aspects of local life (Rickly-Boyd & Metro-Roland, 2010;
Giovanardi et al., 2014). The sense of place of the destination also holds cultural and social meanings
(Sharpley & Jepson, 2011), which play a role in the reflexive negotiation and formation of the tourist’s
identity and agency (Crouch, 2005, p. 18-19; Knudsen et al., 2007). Further, the physical engagement
with the environment was also found to heighten the visitors’ awareness on a multisensory level,
providing feelings of connectedness and place attachment (Fredrickson & Anderson, 1999; McDonald
et al., 2009; Sharpley & Jepson, 2011).
While it is possible to draw potential facilitators of tourist transformation from previous literature,
namely peak episodes, interaction with locals and sense of place, existing research has yet to further
test their importance and investigate elements in the tourism experience that may inhibit the
transformative process. As opposed to experiencing difference and novelty, Gnoth and Matteucci (2014)
argue that repeatedly practiced behaviour, such as relaxing in a resort, tends to promote self-
consolidation, rather than self-exploration. Therefore, repetitive activity in the destination could
represent a potential inhibitor of tourist transformative change, suggesting that further research is
needed to test whether repeated behaviour and other factors may be identified as transformation
inhibitors, or facilitators.
Methodology
In order to analyse transformative tourism experiences and explore tourist transformation facilitators
and inhibitors, this paper adopted a qualitative approach. Qualitative studies are suitable for producing
valuable contribution to our understanding of transformative tourism, since exhaustive theoretical
knowledge on these experiences is lacking, and further research is still needed to have the conceptual
foundations to develop a tourist transformation framework and scale. Participants were selected
through non-probability purposive sampling, seeking interviewees with different ages and males and
females, to provide heterogeneity of experiences (Patton, 2002; Palinkas et al., 2015). In contrast with
Kirillova et al. (2016) and Coghlan and Weiler (2018)’s studies, the recruitment for this study did not
exclude individuals who had not experienced transformative tourism, as one of the study’s main
objectives was to investigate tourist transformation inhibitors, and there was therefore a need to also
explore why transformation did not occur. Further, the reflective travel phase (i.e. ‘after’ travel) was
chosen as temporal dimension over interviewing tourists at the destination, because the paper aimed
at investigating the whole tourism experience and the negotiated meanings of transformation and
wellbeing after travel, in accordance with the necessity to evaluate different moments and processes
across the antecedent, on-site and reflective phases of the experience (Filep & Deery, 2010; Filep, 2014;
Lean, 2012). Data were collected using semi-structured interviews, and the interviews were conducted
face to face (10 interviews) and via Skype (3 interviews), with a ranging duration between 20 and 60
minutes. Previous studies focusing on investigating transformative tourism experiences have employed
a similar number of interviews (10 by Kirillova et al., 2016; 10 in the case of Coghlan & Weiler, 2018), and
Coghlan and Weiler (2018) argue that such limited number of interviews is ideal for focusing on the
lived experiences of transformative processes to be understood and delved into. Data saturation was
also achieved through 13 interviews due to the final similarity in responses given by the participants on
transformation and wellbeing meanings (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, p. 61; Guest et al., 2006).
The flexible interview protocol consisted of six general questions: the first question aimed at possibly
identifying a transformative travel experience to be described by the participant (“Drawing from your
experience, could you talk about a past travel experience that you think changed you as a person?”).
5
Further questions were employed to investigate possible factors and characteristics of transformation,
such as describing the specific moment when transformation took place, discussing crucial interactions
with other people, as well as emotions and meanings that were generated (“When you had this travel
experience, were you going through a peculiar/special time of your life?”, “Can you describe how you
noticed that something was changing? Why do you think this travel experience managed to change you
as a person?”, “What kind of positive and/or negative emotions were generated by your perceptions of
change caused by this travel experience?”). Finally, the participants were required to reflect and
elaborate on their happiness and wellbeing after their travel experience, while considering whether their
transformation and increased wellbeing were still in place at the time at the interview (i.e. in the long
term) (“Did your travel experiences generate a perception of wellbeing and/or happiness in you?”, “Can
you describe how the changes you experienced have influenced your life?”).
In case the interviewees did not recall of having been transformed through travel, they were asked to
describe their most enjoyed trip instead, and the interview proceeded with questions about produced
meanings, emotions and episodes contributing to their potential wellbeing/happiness. These interviews
were considered useful to the end of identifying transformation inhibitors, while the investigation of
increased wellbeing as travel outcome remained unmodified. Since this is a post-trip study, a bias in
memory formation of the experience (Scott et al., 2017) was expected, but not analysed.
The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Italy was the location where interviews were
conducted. The interviews were entirely transcribed and then translated to English as they were
conducted in the interviewees’ native language. For the data analysis, the authors initially read the
transcripts to familiarise with the data and to clarify any issues arising from the translation of interview
data (e.g. lexical, semantic and syntactical problems: Suh et al., 2009) in English. The data were then
analysed through thematic coding to identify subjective meanings of the travel experiences, with both
open and axial coding. The initial codes were reviewed by the research team, and an independent person
revised the coding and decided whether he/she agreed with the codes. Whenever the research team
and the independent reviewer disagreed about the adopted coding, discussions were made until an
agreement was reached, and the final coding was then undertaken. The emerged themes related to
transformation and wellbeing were then matched to constructs built from the literature review.
Results and Discussion

Table 1 provides general information about the profile of the participants who took part in the study.
The interviewees were aged 25 to 74; eight were in their 20s and 30s, while five were aged 53 and over.
The sample consisted of 8 female participants and 5 male participants; they had different levels of
education and professional status, including students, business owners and managers, a chef, a teacher,
an office clerk and retired professionals, to have a comprehensive understanding of the meaning of
transformative tourism experiences for different people. The interviewees came from Italy; the countries
visited in their travel accounts ranged from UK, Italy, Sweden, Spain, Hungary, Turkey, Brazil, Australia,
to New Zealand, India, Tunisia and Uganda. As ensured by the sampling choice, the participants had
engaged in different numbers of trips (from frequent experiences to occasional short holidays) and in
different types of travel, such as student exchange programmes, business trips, leisure trips and spiritual
retreats (See Table 1). Nine participants experienced transformative change as a result of tourism
experiences, while four participants did not, including two interviewees who during the course of the
interview renegotiated their response and revealed perceived transformation. Moreover, some
participants felt the necessity to expand their account to more than one experience, arbitrarily
comparing between trips and their related different meanings.
6
Table 1. Summary of interviewees’ characteristics

Interviewee Gender Age Destination Stay Type of Companions Trans-
Stay formation
ID1 Female 30 New Zealand Long Working None Yes
holiday
ID2 Male 27 Canary Short Leisure Met a friend in No
Islands destination
ID3 Female 56 Switzerland Short Health Partner Yes
ID4 Female 74 Brazil Long Leisure Friend Yes
ID5 Female 31 Sweden & Long Student None Yes
London (UK) exchange
ID6 Male 33 Turkey Short Leisure Girlfriend Yes
ID7 Female 26 Italy Short Leisure Boyfriend & Yes
friends
ID8 Male 65 Many Short- Work Local business No -> Yes
destinations medium partners
ID9 Female 27 Australia & Medium- Visiting Family No
Ngamba long relative
Island
(Uganda)
ID10 Female 53 India Short Spiritual None No -> Yes
ID11 Male 30 London Short Leisure Sister & friend Yes
ID12 Male 25 Australia Long Working Partner Yes
holiday
ID13 Female 27 Hungary Long Student None Yes
exchange
In the following section, the meanings assigned to transformative travel experiences are analysed,
especially subjective aspects (i.e. increased self-efficacy, becoming humbler, and being enriched), as
perceived by the participants. Then, the analysis proceeds to discuss transformation facilitators
(namely, social interaction, challenges, sense of place, long stays and post-travel reflection) and
inhibitors (i.e. short stays, repeated practices, lack of access to the residents’ lifestyle), and finally
explores the impact of transformation and the nature of wellbeing provided by tourism according to the
participants. Figure 1 provides a visual aid and conceptual framework of the main concepts and findings,
which are discussed in the following section.
Transformative tourism meanings

In describing their experiences of transformative tourism, the main meanings interviewees generally
associated with transformation through tourism were the encounter with different people and cultures,
general enrichment and an expanded worldview, thus supporting prior studies discussing self-
development and cross-cultural awareness as transformative outcomes (e.g. Brown, 2009; Mkono, 2016;
Reisinger, 2013). However, when enquired about their subjective transformation, the participants
mostly reported experiencing three main changes (discussed below): increased self-efficacy, becoming
humbler and being enriched.
Increased self-efficacy
Greater efficacy in facing challenges represented the interviewees’ main change. While visiting the
destination, the participants recounted about overcoming challenges, such as learning the local
language and managing to communicate with residents, solving problems arising during the stay and
negotiating travel plans with the travel companions.
7
Figure 1. Conceptual framework of transformative tourism main concepts, as emerged from this study.
Acquiring this ability: at the beginning I thought I wasn’t a natural at languages, but then,
once [I was] thrown in a context where everyone speaks a language you don’t know, you
slowly find yourself understanding, comprehending and finally being able to speak… So it
was like… Like “I’m also able to speak other languages!” ((laughs)) …And this happened with
learning English, but being in an Erasmus [European student exchange programme]
context, it also happened with Spanish, for example (ID5).
As Brown (2009) notes, a rise in autonomy and self-efficacy can be experienced by international
students as a result of facing challenges and distress while studying and staying in a different cultural
environment. Defined as developing mastery in managing difficult situations and controlling different
life domains as result of holiday breaks (Kakoudakis et al., 2017), self-efficacy was in this study reported
to be the main outcome of our participants’ transformative tourism experiences, contributing to a
heightened sense of self-confidence and self-awareness.
Acquired humility
Another major transformation discussed by interviewees was becoming ‘humbler’. Travel experiences
taught the participants to be free of pre-concepts and keep an open mind towards different people and
contexts according to the destination, sometimes despite common cultural backgrounds. This is
exemplified by the following excerpt, where a participant reflected on his wrong assumptions based on
his previous stay in the United Kingdom and on the following realisation of a different and complex
reality during his working holiday in Australia.
8
It taught me humility towards other kinds of realities I thought to be simpler, much more,
how can I say it… Easier, simpler to analyse, I thought I knew them already, whereas once I
found myself in touch with these realities it was much different from what, how I expected.
(ID12)
Increased humility as meaning and outcome of transformative tourism has not been yet investigated by
existing literature, but may be partially associated with the constructs of developing cross-cultural
awareness and intercultural competence, as tourists become more aware and accepting towards the
difference in practices and values across cultures and have an enhanced frame of reference (Hanvey,
1982; Taylor, 1994; Brown, 2009; Mkono, 2016). While experienced by fewer participants compared to
acquiring humility, several participants also reported a shift in perspective in comparing the locals’
lifestyle and interactions in the destination with the participants’ home country practices, often
resulting in accepting and sometimes appreciating differences. While contradictory at first sight,
witnessing the similarity in rituals despite different backgrounds and religious beliefs led some
participants to interpret and stress the commonality of mankind, as the following quote suggests.
Religion, extreme religions you encounter, and you ask yourself, Muslims, Hindus, the
Ganges is full of people that perform ablutions there, convinced this can bring benefits. You
compare it with your religion and you see common aspects. To them it’s a sort of confession,
a sort of communion, washing in the Ganges to purify themselves from sins. And then you
understand that these are needs that men have, they show them in a way or another, the
need we have to be freed from sins, from guilt, is common to all men, and this clearly leads
you to grow with that mentality and that reasoning. (ID8)
Enrichment
In tourism research, several studies discuss the importance of self-growth as beneficial aspect of travel
(e.g. Filep & Deery, 2010; Smith & Diekmann, 2017). Through transformative tourism experiences,
travellers discussed a perceived personal enrichment. Being ‘enriched’ was found to be a broad
expression encompassing developing new knowledge and feeling emotions that made the experience
unique and memorable, as well as providing the traveller of long-lasting memories. This represented an
interviewee’s state of mind, in the following extract discussing her attitude towards travelling and
recommending it to her friends and family because of its benefits.
But when you mainly have the possibility, even a bit, time- and money-wise, it’s good to be
enriched thinking of and going on trips. It’s a gift for ourselves that doesn’t compare. (ID3)
While, in the literature, humility was found to be an outcome of extreme sports tourism (Reisinger,
2013), the themes of achieving humility and enrichment from transformative tourism lacks further
analysis by the literature, therefore serving as meanings to be investigated by research studying what
tourist transformation entails.
Transformation facilitators
After defining how they personally understood transformation through tourism, the participants
proceeded to describe the personal travel experience they considered to be transformative. The aspects
of these experiences that often recurred in the participants’ descriptions were analysed and interpreted
in this study as main facilitators. Our analysis refers to several relevant aspects: interacting with locals
9
and travellers from other countries, facing challenges, experiencing the sense of place, long stays and post-
travel reflection.
Social interaction
Several interviewees provided accounts of interactions with residents and people of different cultures
they encountered in the destination, and these interactions were found to initiate a process of
transformation. For example, when comparing his business trip with his holidays, this interviewee
mentioned the importance of meeting local colleagues, experiencing their hospitality and witnessing
their different practices, not only making him personally invested in the experience but also as means
to blend in the destination.
When you travel for work, you’re on the road like this, you bump into people of all kinds, of
all types, continually. And the most beautiful thing is this, relating with them
and…accepting them. Because they’re often completely different from what you think they
say and do. (ID8)
This particular extract above also seems to contradict Reisinger (2013)’s consideration of business travel
as a type of travel that cannot provide transformation, and suggests that by combining leisure activities
and informal interactions with the residents, business travel could also hold transformative power.
Among the participants, interacting with locals provided a further sense of the destination and
sometimes constituted the source of reflection and change of perspective, confirming the importance
that existing literature has placed on the role of being exposed to different cultures during tourism
experiences (Adler, 1975; Taylor, 1994; Lean, 2009).
Travelling and interacting with people living there often means realising the routine the
place involves. […] when you talk to members that are present in the social fabric, […] there
are more incentives as people know the place where they stay, and they explain the culture
in a better way, or some people are quite disillusioned and disappointed at their own reality
and they show it, they make you understand the routine and the negative sides of the place
where you’re staying too. […] meeting with and knowing people from there, Australians,
understanding the culture, understanding the city and discovering many little places, many
small things, was very important, interesting. It changed me, it taught me humility from
my perspective as a person. (ID12)
Communicating with locals and witnessing moments of their everyday life is viewed as a factor that
encourages self-reflection as well as the negotiation of conflicting values (Milman et al., 1990; Roberson,
2003; Yu & Lee, 2014).
Challenges
Interacting with people from different countries in the destination also constituted one of the
environmental factors that led interviewees to face challenges, usually found in language barriers and
learning ways to communicate with locals and to enjoy their stay. Generally, in their narratives,
participants dwelled on issues and problems encountered during the trip, from discovering a mistake
in the hotel reservation, clashing with travel companions, to simply finding themselves far from their
usual social sphere of support.
Travel allows you to face new situations you don’t face in daily life, so, in a sense, to be
emancipated and grow. All those trips being alone or finding yourself in situations where
10
you’re not supported by that - group of friends or people that can help you. […] it’s a matter
of finding yourself alone in new situations that force you, in a positive and negative way, to
know yourself better and so to change too. We were little and the experience was that,
despite having paid everything for the hotel, we arrive and the guy tells us that the room
wasn’t booked. And I couldn’t speak, I wasn’t very confident in speaking English well, and I
was the only one who had the courage to be able to do it. And, well, I then solved everything
but it was moments of terror, you know ((laughs)). In another country, alone, young, with
two people who didn’t speak the language well and that were very afraid because they didn’t
understand anything. So then I said “Yes, I can do it. I can solve a booking at a hotel”. (ID11)
In transformative tourism research, challenges have been found to lead individuals to develop personal
development and cultural adaptation in volunteer tourism and study abroad experiences (Wearing,
2001; Fordham, 2006; Gill, 2007; Brown, 2009; Kontogeorgopoulos, 2017), and in our findings they
characterised indeed study abroad, but also other experiences, ranging from short trips to business
travel. These challenges were followed by the participants gradually gaining courage and finding
solutions, showing other people and especially themselves how they were able to overcome fears and
adapt for survival and a better experience. For example, an interviewee found herself to become stronger
and ready to face unpredicted events during her travels trips in Northern Italy.
This was clearly a big step forward for me as I was very shy and introverted, to manage
in…different things, not only while travelling, but [becoming] a little more alert ((snaps
fingers)), resourceful in all things, because clearly if you have to travel you have to get it
together, otherwise, bye-bye! (ID7)
In general, these challenges led the participants to be more aware of their limits and strengths, as well
as to be more confident in what would have seemed unforeseen situations.
Sense of place
Besides social interaction and challenges, the destination’s sense of place had the transformative power
to convey strong emotions and new meanings to the participants. For one interviewee, visiting Istanbul
represented more than his first holiday abroad, it became a multi-sensorial experience made up by the
urban environment and the contradicting practices. The novelty and cultural contradictions were
particularly felt as a way to escape ordinary life, to erase pre-assumptions about life outside Europe,
while absorbing beauty and learning about a new reality.
Diving into a world that’s like ours, on one hand, meaning that it comes from European
culture, but also comes from a different culture, the Arab culture, and this is very much felt,
you strongly feel the weight of work, […] of communication, even just the fact of the singing
at dawn, of the prayer from Hagia Sophia at dawn, or from the different mosques. […] While
we crossed areas, nearby boroughs, where the weight of religion gradually got stronger,
almost in an exponential way, the more you moved from the centre, the more you felt the
influence of religion and tradition, and that was the journey inside the journey: discovering
a part of the city that was a few kilometres from the centre, and I would have never imagined
this… that makes you immerse in a world that’s not yours and that makes you personally
see […] going back and analysing what has been at a kilometres distance, after a while. And
you then realise that there’s something different, in the way I relate to the place, to the
people too, to everything. (ID6)
11
This excerpt provides an example of how locals may share their environment with tourists and play an
effective role in providing a transformative sense of place (e.g. Rickly-Boyd & Metro-Roland, 2010; Rakić
& Chambers, 2012; Giovanardi et al., 2014). Therefore, this finding enhances our understanding on how
the destination setting, experienced through the tourists’ senses, has the potential to not only develop
place attachment (Fredrickson & Anderson, 1999; McDonald et al., 2009; Sharpley & Jepson, 2011), but
also leave a strong impact on memory and facilitate tourist transformation.
Long stays
In general, transformation seemed to require some time for the previous tourists to (self-)explore and
notice underlying meanings during the visit to a destination. Therefore, it was found that long stays
provided the participants with more sources for reflection and involving more of what we considered
to be transformation facilitators in the destination (e.g. social engagement with travellers and residents,
and challenges). In the following interview extract, a participant described the gradual acquaintance
with a lesbian couple of travellers escaping China and trying to settle in New Zealand, which she realised
during the interview was a meaningful part of her one-year long working holiday.
I spent 11 months in New Zealand […] I guess that’s the time I gradually realised, for me it
was to know more about LGBT people. They left China because it’s a very traditional place
where they don’t accept these things. […] New Zealand is a place where they accepted LGBT
marriage by that time. They went there and prepared everything so they could be recognised
by that country, so they could be legal and official partners. I enjoyed their company, I
witnessed how people care about each other, support each other even though they suffer,
you know, they have families in China, they cannot tell who they are to their parents. And
they continued to make a living, find a job, and try to get a permanent residence there, so
they could stay there and get a better life. That was the time I felt everyone has their own
problems, what I worry about all day is not to at the same level as they worry about. (ID1)
This suggests that transformation may more likely occur when cultural differences between visitors and
locals are particularly pronounced and prolonged (e.g. Christie & Mason, 2003, p. 1). Overall, the finding
seems to confirm the literature’s assumption that longer journeys and considerable lengths of time away
from home will more likely cause the individual to undergo transformation (e.g. Kottler, 1997).
Peak episodes / post-travel reflection
When asked about how and when they noticed that transformation had occurred, the majority of
participants reported that they did not realise it during the experience, but rather made sense of the
transformation after the trip and perceived it as the result of several events and introspective processes.
I think I sort of started being more aware of things after high school, after university or
during university, that’s what I would tie it too. But on the other hand I would also say
there’s not a specific time [I noticed change] because I’ve always grown up travelling […].
So I don’t think it’s been like, it’s not like all of a sudden I’m paying attention to these things,
it’s been a gradual thing, awareness. (ID9)
I realized that something changed when the people close to me talked about elements,
things of which I had never even heard. […] I didn’t realise it in that moment, I realised it
thinking about it later. They are all things one realises later, I think, it’s not something we
can tell while it’s occurring, because experiences are often not well analysed by our brain
while we’re still travelling. (ID12)
12
The lack of specific moments triggering the transformation or sudden revelations in our analysis
contradicts Kirillova et al. (2016)’s consideration of peak episodes as necessary epiphanies or
serendipitous episodes that need to occur towards the end of the trip to facilitate existential
transformation.
Instead, without being asked, participants shared their opinion of what a tourist would need to have
and experience transformation: a certain number of trips, a flexible mind-set and post-travel reflection.
You need several trips to transform, you need to see a lot of things to be able to see, to
understand specific things or to change point of view, because I think that this depends on
how much you move, from where you depart, what you want to see and so, that’s basically
what transforms you as a person, I think… […] and if one manages to do this repetitively
and continually, I think so. (ID2)
Time and reflection after the interviewees returned home were considered fundamental to ‘metabolise’
and process their transformation (Lean, 2009), to then being able to describe it. Further, two
interviewees initially reported no transformation undergone, but while recounting their memorable
experiences, they slowly identified personal growth and several changes in their attitudes. Therefore,
this study also confirms the importance of interviews, narration and storytelling for tourists to reflect
on the impact of transformative tourism (Coghlan & Weiler, 2018), as the participants grew more aware
of their transformation by narrating their experiences through stories and in-depth narratives.
Transformation inhibitors
Based on the analysis of tourism experiences that participants described as not being transformative, it
was found that several elements hindered the start of a transformative process, namely: short stays,
repeated practices and the lack of access to the residents’ lifestyle. These were considered
transformation inhibitors.
While Lean (2009, 2012) challenged the correlation between trip duration and transformation, our study
found that short trips presented fewer transformation facilitators compared to long stays. Repetitive
activities, such as sightseeing, short tours and nightlife activities were also found not to stimulate
reflection or transformation. This was especially true when the tourists travelled with familiar travel
companions (e.g. family, friends, partner) and if they were not able to experience social interactions
with the residents.
Yes, I was with […] my boyfriend. We were with another friends couple. The trip lasted two
days. We went to Genoa because there was a concert ((laughs)), okay, sorry, it was a metal
concert and I fell asleep in the front row […] We went around the city in its little streets, we
saw many traditional small shops, the traditional gastronomy and… The trip didn’t last
much ((laughs)). In that case. […] Going to Milan, then going to do internships, going to
visit someone else who was near Milan, I opened myself up. (ID7)
A short while ago I’ve been to London, still visiting a friend that lives and works there and I
haven’t had many interactions with local residents, with Londoners or English people in
general. Because I went out with my friend or with her colleagues who were not English, but
Italian, Spanish, Thai and so on. […] But on a personal relationship level it certainly didn’t
struck me like it happened in the Canary Islands. […] The Canary Islands were different
13
because I didn’t know what to expect, maybe I didn’t know the place as well as I knew
London, so finding that kind of world with its specific features struck me more. (ID2)
This finding may further support Gnoth and Matteucci (2014)’s consideration of repetitive activities in
tourism as a crucial component of self-consolidation and re-discovery, as opposed to exploration and
transformative activities, while short stays and familiar travel companions may further characterise a
tourism experience without transformative outcomes.
Tourist wellbeing and transformation longevity

Eudaimonic meaning
Based on the analysis of the narratives provided and the meanings assigned by the participants, their
increase in wellbeing was defined as fulfilment, satisfied curiosity, wonder and learning, therefore
corresponding to eudaimonia, rather than hedonic meanings and happiness (e.g. Ryan & Deci, 2001;
Keyes & Annas, 2009; Pyke et al., 2016). When asked about achieving happiness through tourism, a
number of interviewees took more time to reflect on their travel experiences and questioned the
meaning of happiness, often expanding the discourse with their personal meanings of self-development.
As Filep (2014) deemed subjective wellbeing to be an unsatisfying measure of tourist happiness and has
called for the analysis of meaningful experiences, the same perspective was also expressed in the
response of our participants.
There were some instances where after the trip I felt happy… But I’m not sure, I’m not
convinced I would use that as a word. That’s not the first word that I would think of. […]
You feel so lucky, not everybody gets to do that. It’s the kind of things you do once in a
lifetime. I feel, like, that much richer. (ID9)
I think I’ve never gone on trips where I haven’t had fun or I haven’t been well. Or where I
haven’t found benefits for the long term. Even if the trip in itself wasn’t particularly
enthusing, it was an experience from which I gained positive lessons. (ID11)
Like eudaimonia, fulfilment and enrichment characterised both the interviewees’ positive and negative
experiences. Further, the identification of facing and overcoming challenges as transformation
facilitator may stress the importance of experiencing negative and unexpected situations to grow and
become better equipped for future travel complications or everyday-life constraints.
Increased wellbeing across the experience

Compared to transformation, which sometimes was not experienced or detected, greater wellbeing was
always an acknowledged outcome of tourism. On the whole, participants perceived increased wellbeing
prior the departure, during and after the trip. Travel planning itself was found to be a recurring phase
in which interviewees felt excited and happy.
Even just the idea of travelling and planning it. We’re travelling again and I already planned
everything ((laughs)). Even being there, reading the travel guide, reading… finding a place
where to stay overnight, seeing the routes to take, having a first approach with the place,
seeing the images of the place while you don’t know how it is yet: it puts you in a good mood.
Because you’re getting ready to discover, to go to see new things, so yes, wellbeing,
absolutely, because you’re carefree, you’re cheerful, you are indeed having a leisure trip…
(ID5)
14
This finding seems to further suggest that holiday takers particularly experience greater wellbeing in
the antecedent phase of the trip (Nawijn et al., 2010; Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004).
With regard to the actual longevity of transformation and increased wellbeing obtained from the
tourism experience, most participants felt their personal changes and realisations still had effects at the
time of the interview. For some, their transformation was permanent due to a number of aspects, such
as the great strength of emotions experienced, or travelling more and further expanding their
worldview.
Permanently, definitely. So, it’s a permanent change because it taught me and it made me
understand that to comprehend the situations and to comprehend any person you have to
be there to judge it, you can’t judge it from your comfortable chair. (ID12)
Well… I think it’s just a growth process that goes through your life. Somebody who’s always
done a lot of travelling, and I think the more places you go to, the more exotic places, the
more different, the more challenging things you do, the more exposure it just gives you over
time, as to what you gain and what you learn from the travel, but it’s always there and it’s
always moving forward. […] With WhatsApp and what not, and the TV… You get to see and
learn so much without going and experiencing, but in the end there’s nothing like first-hand
experience, and that’s what you get when you travel. The other thing that travel does is, it
just shows you that there are so many other options and so many other ways of doing
things. And that makes you a more flexible and broad-minded person... (ID10)
This result contradicts the previous studies’ understanding of transformation as tourism activities only
causing temporary changes (Salazar, 2004, Lean, 2009; Moscardo, 2009), and supports that
transformation may last over time, through narrating these experiences and reflecting on personal
changes.
Conclusion
This study aimed to analyse the meanings and characteristics travellers assign to transformative
tourism, and to investigate transformation facilitators and inhibitors, while exploring the relation
between tourist transformation and wellbeing.
Our findings expand our limited understanding on how transformative tourism experiences are
characterised and how tourist transformation and wellbeing are perceived by travellers. As result of
their experience, participants described their subjective tourist transformation as achieving greater self-
efficacy, humility and enrichment. Several factors were identified as facilitating transformation, namely:
interacting with residents and other travellers, experiencing the sense of place, overcoming challenges,
long stays and post-travel reflection. Short stays, repeated practices and the lack of access to the
residents’ lifestyle emerged as transformation inhibitors. In this study, the occurrence of peak episodes
or epiphanies (Kirillova et al., 2016) was not found to play a central role in initiating transformation,
while importance was placed in post-travel reflection (Aho, 2001; Coghlan & Weiler, 2018) to make sense
of the transformative experience as a combination of different facilitators and processes. Further, this
paper further showed that, in any tourism type engaged, increased wellbeing was perceived by all
participants and considered to hold eudaimonic meanings rather than pure pleasure. In the findings,
compared to wellbeing, transformation was more problematic to be detected and discussed by the
interviewees: not all participants reported experiencing transformative change through tourism,
meaning that tourist transformation requires certain facilitators (above described) to occur. This
15
disputed the idea of wellbeing as outcome of transformative tourism experiences, and confirmed that
not all travel experiences are transformative. However, when transformation emerged, it was believed
to be permanent and long-lasting, contradicting the literature’s assumption that transformative travel
benefits are only short-lived (Salazar, 2004, Lean, 2009; Moscardo, 2009).
From a practical perspective, our study provides insights on how to develop transformative tourism
products. By discussing tourist transformation characteristics, facilitators and inhibitors, it contributes
to the limited understanding of transformative tourism experiences, which comprise different
facilitators, activities and outcomes, that could be purposefully designed and delivered. Specifically, this
study suggests that tourism organisations should enhance the experience of travel planning, so
increased wellbeing and self-evaluation can be further built prior to travel. This could be done by
encouraging the traveller to research the chosen destination via social media platforms to gather
information about local identities and practices, and by also shaping local volunteer communities that
prepare the traveller for the experience by sharing highlights and knowledge on destination lifestyles
and environments. Since the exposure to locals and people from different countries proved to have an
important role in developing the tourists’ adaptation skills, confidence and self-awareness, travellers
should also be provided with frequent opportunities to engage with the destination community and
fellow travellers, especially during short stays where transformation can be inhibited by the limited
available time. The sense of place could also be further developed by destination management bodies,
with marketing strategies aimed at strengthening the uniqueness of the cultural and environmental
assets, as well as involving residents with beneficial initiatives showcasing their traditions. All these
conditions would purposefully facilitate the travellers’ transformation, increasing their self-efficacy,
humility and enrichment, and would also contribute to their eudaimonic wellbeing, with a potential
greater impact on society. Finally, communication channels stimulating the reminiscence and
recollection of transformative experiences could improve the longevity of transformation, which in this
study was found to be achievable. This could consist of platforms, such as sensorial staging and ad-hoc
blogs, where individuals could participate post travel, recollecting and enhancing their transformative
tourism experiences.
Despite its contributions and implications, this paper includes several limitations. The sample
exclusively interviewed Italian respondents, so future studies could employ a cross-cultural
investigation of how transformative experiences, including facilitators and inhibitors, differ according
to the tourist’s cultural background (Lean, 2012). Further, while most studies on transformative tourism
have analysed specific types of tourism activities, more research is particularly recommended to further
understand the meaning of tourist transformation and what type of transformation may be conveyed
according to experience, so that operators would be more knowledgeable in designing different
transformative tourism experiences. Furthermore, this study did not try to investigate what is the extent
of change that it is needed to characterise tourist transformation (e.g. in terms of time, depth of change,
etc.): these aspects would merit attention in future studies. Since our study used a qualitative approach
and found that tourist transformation may be long-lasting, a longitudinal approach employing
innovative tools could monitor travel experiences over time, to better understand which factors increase
the lifespan of transformation (Reisinger, 2013), and how they may influence the tourist wellbeing.
Acknowledgments
Giacomo Del Chiappa gratefully acknowledges the financial support provided by the University of
Sassari (Fondo di Ateneo per la ricerca 2019), project “Toward critical transformative marketing
research: bringing individual and community wellbeing through experience design”.
16
Jessica Mei Pung gratefully acknowledges Sardinian Regional Government for the financial support of
her PhD scholarship (P.O.R. Sardegna F.S.E. – Operational Programme of the Autonomous Region of
Sardinia, European Social Fund 2014-2020 – Axis III Education and training, Thematic goal 10,
Investment Priority 10ii), Specific goal 10.5.
References
Adler, P. S. (1975). The Transitional Experience: An Alternative View of Culture Shock. Journal of
Humanistic Psychology, 15(4), 13-23.
Aho, S. K. (2001). Towards a general theory of touristic experiences: Modelling experience process in
tourism. Tourism Review, 56(3/4), 33-37.
Anderson, L., Ostrom, A. L., Corus, C., Fisk, R. P., Gallan, A. S., Giraldo, M., Mende, M., Mulder, M.,
Rayburn, S. W., Rosenbaum, M. S., Shirahada, K., & Williams, J. D. (2013). Transformative Service
Research: An Agenda for the Future. Journal of Business Research, 66 (8), 1203-1210.
Anderson, L., & Ostrom, A. L. (2015). Transformative Service Research: Advancing Our Knowledge
About Service and Well-Being. Journal of Service Research, 18(3), 243-249.
Andrews, H. (2009). Tourism as ‘Moment of Being’. Suomen Antropologi: Journal of the Finnish
Anthropological Society, 34(2), 5-21.
Arnould, E. J., & Price, L. L. (1993). River magic: extraordinary experience and the extended service
encounter. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 24-45.
Blocker, C. P., & Barrios, A. (2015). The Transformative Value of a Service Experience. Journal of Service
Research, 18(3), 265-283.
Boswijk A., Peelen E., & Olthof, S. (2013). Economy of Experiences. Amsterdam: European Centre for the
Experience Economy.
Brown, L. (2009). The transformative power of the international sojourn: An ethnographic study of the
international student experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(3), 502-521.
Brown, L. (2013). Tourism: A catalyst for existential authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research, 40, 176–
190.
Christie, M. F., & Mason, P. A. (2003). Transformative Tour guiding: Training Tour Guides to be
Critically Reflective Practitioners. Journal of Ecotourism, 2(1), 1-16.
Coghlan, A., & Gooch, M. (2011). Applying a transformative learning framework to volunteer tourism.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(6), 713-728.
Coghlan, A., & Weiler, B. (2018). Examining transformative processes in volunteer tourism. Current
Issues in Tourism, 21(5), 567-582.
Crouch, D. (2005). Flirting with space - tourism geographies as sensuous/expressive practice. In C.
Cartier and A. A. Lew (eds.) (2005). Seductions of place: geographical perspectives on globalization
and touristed landscapes. Abingdon: Routledge, 16-31.
Decrop, A., Del Chiappa, G., Mallargé, J., & Zidda, P. (2018) “Couchsurfing has made me a better person
and the world a better place”: the transformative power of collaborative tourism experiences. Journal
of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 35(1), 57-72.
Desforges, L. (2000). Traveling the world: Identity and Travel Biography. Annals of Tourism Research,
27(4), 926-945.
Deville, A., & Wearing, S. (2013). WWOOFing Tourists, Beaten Tracks and Transformational Paths. In
Y. Reisinger (ed.) (2013). Transformational Tourism: Tourist Perspectives. Wallingford: CABI, 151-168.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of
progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.
Dolnicar, S., Lazarevski, K., & Yanamandram, V. (2013). Quality of life and tourism: a conceptual
framework and novel segmentation base. Journal of Business Research, 66(6), 724-729.
17
Erichsen, E. A. (2011). Learning for Change: Transforming International Experience as Identity Work.
Journal of Transformative Education, 9(2), 109-133.
European Union (2019). Migration and Mobility. URL: https://europa.eu/globalstrategy/en/migration-
mobility-0 (Accessed on 12.03.2019).
Eusébio, C., & Carnerio, M. J. (2014). The Impact of Tourism on Quality of Life: A Segmentation Analysis
of the Youth Market. Tourism Analysis, 19(6), 741-757.
Everett, S., & Parakoottathil, D. J. (2018). Transformation, meaning-making and identity creation
through folklore tourism: the case of the Robin Hood Festival. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 13(1), pp.
30-45.
Fan, D. X. F., Zhang H. Q., Jenkins, C. L., & Lin, P. M. C. (2017). Does Tourist-Host Social Contact Reduce
Perceived Cultural Distance? Journal of Travel Research, 56(8), 998-1010.
Filep, S., & Deery, M. (2010). Towards a Picture of Tourists’ Happiness. Tourism Analysis, 15(4), 399-410.
Filep, S., & Laing, J. (2019). Trends and Directions in Tourism and Positive Psychology. Journal of Travel
Research, 58(3), 343-354.
Filep, S. (2014). Moving Beyond Subjective Well-Being: A Tourism Critique. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 38(2), 266-274.
Fordham, T. (2006). Pedagogies of Cultural Change: The Rotary International Youth Exchange Program
and Narratives of Travel and Transformation. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 3(3), 143-159.
Fredrickson, L. M., & Anderson, D. H. (1999). A qualitative exploration of the wilderness experience as
a source of spiritual inspiration. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(1), 21-39.
Fu, X., Tanyatanaboon, M., & Lehto, X. Y. (2015). Conceptualizing transformative guest experience at
retreat centers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 49, 83-92.
Gilbert, D., & Abdullah, J. (2004). Holidaytaking and the sense of well-being. Annals of Tourism
Research, 31(1), 103-121.
Gill, S. (2007). Overseas students' intercultural adaptation as intercultural learning: a transformative
framework. Compare, 37(2), 167-183.
Giovanardi, M., Lucarelli, A., & L’Espoir Decosta, P. (2014). Co-performing tourism places: The “Pink
Night” festival. Annals of Tourism Research, 44, 102-115.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New
York: Aldine.
Gnoth, J., & Matteucci, X. (2014). A phenomenological view of the behavioral tourism research literature.
Internal Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(1), 3-21.
Grabowski, S., Wearing, S., Lyons, K., Tarrant, M., & Landon, A. (2017). A rite of passage? Exploring
youth transformation and global citizenry in the study abroad experience. Tourism Recreation
Research, 42, 139-149.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data
Saturation and Variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.
Hanvey, R. G. (1982). An attainable global perspective. Theory Into Practice, 21(3), 162-167.
Heintzmann, P. (2013). Retreat tourism. In Y. Reisinger (ed.) (2013) Transformational Tourism: Tourist
Perspectives. Wallingford: CABI, 68-81.
Heo, Y. J. C. (2016). Sharing economy and prospects in tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research,
58(C), 166-170.
Hottola, P. (2004). Culture confusion: intercultural adaptation in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,
31(2), 447-466.
Inkson, K., & Myers, B. A. (2003). “The big OE”: self-directed travel and career development. Career
Development International, 8(4), 170-181.
18
Kakoudakis, K. I., McCabe, S., & Story, V. (2017). Social tourism and self-efficacy: Exploring links
between tourism participation, job-seeking and unemployment. Annals of Tourism Research, 65,
108-121.
Kanning, M. (2013). Returning Home: Reflections on Lifestyle Transformation Resulting from
International Backpacker Travels. In Y. Reisinger (2013) (ed.). Transformational Tourism: Tourist
Perspectives. Wallingford: CABI, 125-135.
Keyes, C. L. M., & Annas, J. (2009). Feeling good and functioning well: distinctive concepts in ancient
philosophy and contemporary science. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(3), 197-201.
Kirillova, K., Lehto, X., & Cai, L. (2016). Tourism and Existential Transformation: An Empirical
Investigation. Journal of Travel Research, 56(5), 638-650.
Kirillova, K., Lehto, X., & Cai, L. (2017). What triggers transformative tourism experiences? Tourism
Recreation Research, 42(4), 498-511.
Knudsen, D. C., Soper, A. K., & Metro-Roland, M. (2007). Commentary: Gazing, Performing and
Reading: A Landscape Approach to Understanding Meaning in Tourism Theory. Tourism
Geographies, 9(3), 227-233.
Kottler, J. (1997). Travel That Can Change Your Life: How to Create a Transformative Experience. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kontogeorgopoulos, N. (2017). Finding oneself while discovering others: An existential perspective on
volunteer tourism in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 65, 1-12.
Lean, G. L. (2009) Transformative Travel: Inspiring Sustainability. In R. Bushell and P. J. Sheldon (eds.)
(2009). Wellness and Tourism: Mind, Body, Spirit, Place. Elmsford: Cognizant Communication, 191–
205.
Lean, G. L. (2012). Transformative travel: A mobilities perspective. Tourist Studies, 12(2), 151-172.
Lean, G., Staiff, R., & Waterton, E. (eds.) (2014). Travel and Transformation. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Magee, R., & Gilmore, A. (2015). Heritage site management: from dark tourism to transformative service
experience? The Service Industries Journal, 35(15-16), 898-917.
Matthews, A. (2014). Young backpackers and the rite of passage of travel: examining the transformative
effects of liminality. In G. Lean, R. Staiff, & E. Waterton (eds.) (2014). Travel and Transformation.
Aldershot: Ashgate, 157-171.
McCabe, S., Joldersma, T., & Li, C. (2010). Understanding the benefits of social tourism: linking
participation to subjective well-being and quality of life. International Journal of Tourism Research,
12(6), 761-773.
McDonald, M. G., Wearing, S., & Ponting, J. (2009). The Nature of Peak Experience in Wilderness. The
Humanistic Psychologist, 37(4), 370-385.
Mende, M., & van Doorn, J. (2014). Coproduction of Transformative Services as a Pathway to Improved
Consumer Well-Being. Findings from a Longitudinal Study on Financial Counseling. Journal of
Service Research, 18(3), 351-368.
Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective Transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 28(2), 100-110.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Milman, A., Reichel, A., & Pizam, A. (1990). The Impact of Tourism on Ethnic Attitudes: The Israeli-
Egyptian Case. Journal of Travel Research, 29(2), 45-49.
Milstein, T. (2005). Transformation abroad: Sojourning and the perceived enhancement of self-efficacy.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29(2), 217-238.
Mkono, M. (2016). The reflexive tourist. Annals of Tourism Research, 57, 206-219.
Morgan, A. D. (2010). Journeys into Transformation: Travel to An “Other” Place as a Vehicle for
Transformative Learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 8(4), 246-268.
Moscardo, G. (2009). Tourism and quality of life: Towards a more critical approach. Tourism and
Hospitality Research, 9(2), 159-170.
19
Moscardo, G. (2017). Critical reflections on the role of interpretation in visitor management. In J. N.

Albrecht (ed.) (2017). Visitor Management in Tourism Destinations. Wallingford: CABI, 170-187.
Nawijn, J., Marchand, M., Veenhoven, R., & Vingerhoets, A. (2010). Vacationers Happier, but Most not
Happier After a Holiday. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 5(1), 35-47.
Neal, J. D., Sirgy, M. J., Uysal, M. (1999). The Role of Satisfaction with Leisure Travel/ Tourism Services
and Experience in Satisfaction with Leisure Life and Overall Life. Journal of Business Research, 44(3),
153-163.
Neal, J. D., Uysal, M., and Sirgy, M. J. (2007). The Effect of Tourism Services on Travelers' Quality of
Life. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 154-163.
Noy, C. (2004). This trip really changed me: Backpackers’ narratives of self-change. Annals of Tourism
Research, 31(1), 78-102.
Nyaupane, G. P., Teye, V., & Paris, C. (2008). Innocents Abroad: Attitude Change toward Hosts. Annals
of Tourism Research, 35(3), 650-667.
O’Reilly, C. (2006). From drifter to gap year tourist: Mainstreaming Backpacker Travel. Annals of
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful
sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research.
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533-544.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Pearce, P. L. (2010). New Directions for Considering Tourists' Attitudes Towards Others. Tourism
Recreation Research, 35(3), 251-258.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76
(4), 97-105.
Pizam, A., Jafari, J., & Milman, A. (1991). Influence of tourism on attitudes: US students visiting USSR.
Tourism Management, 12(1), 47-54.
Pritchard, A., Morgan, N., & Ateljevic, I. (2011). Hopeful tourism: A New Transformative Perspective.
Annals of Tourism Research, 38(3), 941-963.
Pyke, S., Hartwell, H., Blake, A., & Hemingway, A. (2016). Exploring well-being as a tourism product
resource. Tourism Management, 55, 94-105.
Rakić, T., & Chambers, D. (2012). Rethinking the consumption of places. Annals of Tourism Research,
39(3), 1612-1633.
Reisinger, Y. (2013). Transformational tourism: Tourist perspectives. Wallingford: CABI.
Richards, G. (1999). Vacations and the Quality of life: Patterns and Structures. Journal of Business
Research, 44(3), 189-198.
Rickly-Boyd, J. M., & Metro-Roland, M. M. (2010). Background to the fore: The Prosaic in Tourist Places.
Roberson, D. N. (2003). Learning Experiences of Senior Travellers. Studies in Continuing Education,
25(1), 125-144.
Robledo, M. A., & Batle, J. (2017). Transformational tourism as a hero's journey. Current Issues in
Tourism, 20(16), 1736-1748.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic
and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.
Salazar, N. B. (2004). Developmental tourists vs. development tourism: A case study. In A. Raj (ed.).
Tourist Behaviour: A Psychological Perspective. New Delhi: Kanishka Publishers, 85-107.
Scott, N., Gao, J., & Ma, J. (eds.) (2017). Visitor Experience Design. Wallingford: CABI.
Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011). Rural tourism: A spiritual experience? Annals of Tourism Research,
38(1), 52-71.
20
Smith, M. (2013). Transforming quality of life through wellness tourism. In Y. Reisinger (ed.)
Transformational tourism tourist perspectives. Wallingford: CABI, 68-81.
Smith, M. K., & Diekmann, A. (2014). Tourism and wellbeing. Annals of Tourism Research, 66, 1-13.
Suh, E. E., Kagan, S., & Strumpf, N. (2009). Cultural competence in qualitative interview methods with
Asian immigrants. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 20(2), 194-201.
Taylor, E. W. (1994). Intercultural Competency: A Transformative Learning Process. Adult Education
Quarterly, 44(3), pp. 154-174.
Turner, V. (1969). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. Chicago: Aldine.
Tussyadiah, I. P. (2014). Toward a Theoretical Foundation for Experience Design in Tourism. Journal of
Travel Research, 53(5), 543–564.
Uysal, M., Sirgy, M. J., Woo, E., & Kim, H. (2016). Quality of life (QOL) and well-being research in
tourism. Tourism Management, 53, 244-261.
Voigt, C., Brown, G. and Howat, G. (2011). Wellness tourists: in search of transformation. Tourism
Review, 66(1/2), 16-30.
Wearing, S. (2001). Volunteer tourism: Experiences that make a difference. Wallingford: CABI.
Wearing, S. L., McDonald, M., & Ankor, J. (2016). Journeys of creation: experiencing the unknown, the
Other and authenticity as an epiphany of the self. Tourism Recreation Research, 41(2), 157-167.
Weaver, D. B. (2005). Comprehensive and minimalist dimensions of ecotourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 32(2), 439-455.
Wolf, I. D., Ainsworth, G. B., & Crowley, J. (2017). Transformative travel as a sustainable market niche
for protected areas: a new development, marketing and conservation model. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 25(11), 1650-1673.
Yu, J., & Lee, T. J. (2014). Impact of Tourists’ Intercultural Interactions. Journal of Travel Research, 53(2),
225-238.
Zahra, A., & McIntosh, A. J. (2007). Volunteer Tourism: Evidence of Cathartic Tourist Experiences.
Tourism Recreation Research, 32(1), 115-119.
Coordination editor: Stanislav Ivanov
21
Investigation of the Motivations and Experiences of Tourists
Visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula as a Dark Tourism Destination
Kadir Çakar 1*
1
Mardin Artuklu University, Faculty of Tourism, Kabala Mahallesi, Kabala Merkez, 47080 Artuklu, Mardin, Turkey.
Email: kadircakar@artuklu.edu.tr
Abstract
The present study strives to understand the travel motivations and experiences of both domestic and international
travellers visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula. Qualitative research methodology was utilized for this study, with a case
study approach employed for the qualitative research design. Data were gathered using face-to-face interviews
(n=44), participant observation and document analysis, and an inductive content analysis was then used to analyse
the data. The research findings revealed that travellers visiting the site have different motivations and experiences,
as well as some commonalities. The findings also indicate that those visiting the site have different travel
motivations and experiences, as well as commonalities. Their travel motivations form a heterogeneous pattern,
including push and pull motivational factors, while experiences can be grouped into psychological and socio-
cultural categories; these are useful contributions to the existing literature in the field. As a consequence, the results
of this study are unique as they show that battlefield sites within the scope of the dark tourism phenomenon may
offer visitors memorable tourism experiences and socio-cultural experiences.
Keywords: Dark Tourism, Motivation, Experience, The Case of Gallipoli
Citation: Çakar, G. (2020). Investigation of the Motivations and Experiences of Tourists Visiting the Gallipoli
Peninsula as a Dark Tourism Destination. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2405

RESEARCH PAPER 1
Investigation of the Motivations and Experiences of Tourists Visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula as a Dark Tourism Destination
Introduction
Travellers’ visits to locations or landscapes related to death, disasters or atrocities, once described as
dark tourism by Foley and Lennon (1996a; 1996b; Stone and Sharpley, 2008), continue to receive a great
deal of attention from scholars. While this type of tourism is intertwined with heritage places, the use
of the concept is associated with wide-ranging and varied terms, namely thanatourism, death tourism
and dark heritage (Ivanova and Light, 2017). Many different sub-forms manifest from within the concept
of dark tourism (Váquez, 2018), such as battlefield tourism (Chen and Tsai, 2019; Pennell, 2018), prison
tourism (Strange and Kempa, 2003; Wilson et al., 2017), post-disaster tourism (Lin et al., 2018) and
Dracula tourism (Banyai, 2010; Light, 2007), while also encompassing areas or venues where celebrities
have died (Stone, 2005), concentration camps (Isaac et al., 2019; Nawijn and Fricke, 2015; Podoshen,
2017) and so-called slave castles (Boateng et al., 2018). Although a number of studies have been carried
out so far, there is still something of a gap in the extant literature dealing with the dimensions of both
consumer motivation and experience, which the present paper aims to fill.
In this study, the motivations and experiences of local and foreign tourists (including from Australia,
New Zealand, Turkey, and other countries) who have visited Dardanelles in the context of dark tourism
were studied in depth using a qualitative, comparative approach. This study is expected to make two
basic contributions to the literature. Its first contribution will be as an extensive and in-depth study,
using a qualitative method to discover the similarities and differences between tourists of different
nationalities and cultures with regard to their motivation to visit a destination and their experiences of
that destination in the context of dark tourism. Second, and indeed the most important contribution,
will be as a comparative study of the motivations and tourism experiences of tourists from countries
that participated in the Dardanelles Campaign.
Literature Review
The Concept of Dark Tourism
Dark tourism is defined as visiting places that are offered as marketable tourism products where
important incidents took place in the past, such as natural disasters and wars, which resulted in deaths
and tragedy (Foley and Lennon, 1996a, 2000; 2005; Sharpley, 2009; Wright and Sharpley, 2018). The
media and its impact are shown as factors that have contributed to the emergence and development of
the dark tourism phenomenon (Foley and Lennon, 1996a; 1996b; Korstanje, 2011). It has also been
claimed, in related fields in the literature, that postmodernism has played a significant role in this type
of tourism gaining such popularity (Muzaini, et al., 2007). The concept of dark tourism has gained
greater significance as an area of research in the 21st century, in particular due to the increasing interest
in death and disaster in postmodern societies (Powell and Iankova, 2016, Powell and Kennel, 2016). The
type of tourism in question also comes to the fore as a sub-branch of special interest tourism, which has
developed mostly on a cultural basis (Kozak and Bahçe, 2012; Minic, 2012). Consequently, places offered
for the consumption of tourists within the scope of dark tourism are referred to as cultural heritage sites
(Hartmann, 2014).
It was Rojek (1993) who first referred to places that attract tourists following the sudden deaths of
celebrities or a large number of people, and are consequently commercialised, as “black-spots”. Taking
a similar approach, Foley and Lennon (1996a) used the term “dark tourism” to describe this
phenomenon and Seaton (1996) contributed to a related field in the literature with the concept of
“thanatourism”. Later, Lippard (1999) brought a different insight to the dark tourism phenomenon with
the term “tragic tourism”, while Blom (2000) used the term “morbid tourism” to illustrate this concept.
Since then, Sharpley (2005) has described the dark tourism phenomenon as “grief tourism” whereas
2
Çakar (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2405
Clark (2010) has defined this phenomenon as “trauma tourism”. Lastly, Miller and Gonzales (2013) have
further developed the concept by delineating it as “death-tourism” within the context of dark tourism.
According to Lennon (2005), dark tourism is not a new phenomenon but began in the Middle Ages with
visits to places associated with the past, such as cemeteries, including martyrs’ cemeteries, which had
particular importance for people’s beliefs. In this context, the locations of the Battle of Waterloo in 1815,
the American Civil War, and Ground Zero in New York, where 9/11 took place, have all became popular
places for dark tourism (Coldwell, 2013).
Another important place that can be evaluated within the scope of dark tourism is the Auschwitz
concentration camp in Birkenau, Poland (Miles, 2002; Podoshen and Hunt, 2011). Initially, this place
had only symbolic value following World War II but it has since been turned into a museum and has
become a popular tourism destination with visitors from all over the world. A report in 2014 showed
that the museum has been visited by more than 1.5 million people (Auschwitz Report, 2014).
Other major locations that have dark tourism potential with international popularity are the Tuol Sleng
Genocide Museum in Cambodia (Coldwell, 2013; Sion, 2014), Robben Island Jail in South Africa, Alcatraz
Prison in California, USA (Strange and Kempa, 2003), the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington
D.C., USA (Lennon and Foley, 1999; Miles, 2002), Gallipoli in Çanakkale, which is considered one of the
most important locations of World War I (WWI, 1914-1918) (Hall et al., 2010; Hyde and Harman, 2011;
Slade, 2003; Ozer, Ersoy and Tuzukan, 2012; Cheal and Griffin, 2013), the Pacific war field of World War
II (WWII, 1941-1945) (Cooper, 2006), the place where President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas,
Texas, USA (Foley and Lennon, 1996b) and the Chernobyl nuclear disaster area in Ukraine (Goatcher
and Brunsden, 2011; Schafer, 2016; Stone, 2013a; Yankovska and Hannam, 2014). In a similar way, places
where natural catastrophes such as earthquakes and tsunamis have occurred are also evaluated within
the category indicated above, as places offering tourist experiences in the context of dark tourism
(Amujo and Otubanjo, 2012; Biran, Liu, Li and Eichborn, 2014; Lin et al., 2018).
As dark tourism mostly offers educational and emotional experiences (Biran et al., 2011; Henderson,
2000; Kang et al., 2012), it has been observed that the motivations of tourists visiting such destinations
depend on several factors (Light, 2017; Liyanage et al., 2015). Generally speaking, education,
remembrance, the enhancement of national identity, and interest and curiosity about history are the
primary motivations for dark tourism (Bigley et al., 2010; Cheal and Griffin, 2013; Farmaki, 2013; Isaac
and Çakmak, 2013; Ivanova and Light, 2018; Kang et al., 2018; Raine, 2013; Yuill, 2003; Winter, 2011b;
Zheng et al., 2018).
The most common underlying motivation among tourists seeking dark tourism experiences is collective
memory and the need for empathy that arises from this (Miles, 2002). In this context, another
component of the dark tourism phenomenon are the memories of past tragic incidents that have often
resulted in deaths, that have a place in a society’s collective memory (Conway, 2010). Another aspect of
the emergence and growth of dark tourism that must be emphasized is that it is formed by both supply
and demand (Raine, 2013; Smith and Croy, 2005; Stone, 2006).
Battlefield Tourism in the Context of Dark Tourism

Battlefields and military cemeteries began to be regarded as sacred places in the 19th century (Gatewood
and Cameron, 2004). Battlefield tourism is a type of dark tourism in which museums are founded for
tourists in places where battles took place (Dunkley et al., 2011). Visitors to such places regard them as
heritage sites and attribute new meanings that they have acquired as a result of the historical events
that took place there. Evaluated in this context, celebration activities organized in the name of the
3
protection of such places and their presentation become very important (Winter, 2008). The
phenomenon of battlefield tourism, which focuses on places associated with conflicts such as the
Napoleonic Wars, the American Civil War and World Wars I and II, can be evaluated with reference to
different locations and tourist attractions and regarded as important (Henderson, 2000). In a similar
way, after the Spanish Civil War, places where traces of the war could be found, such as battlefields,
prisons and cemeteries, were protected, restored and transformed into tourism products that were then
opened up to tourists (Smith, 2007).
One of the best examples of battlefield tourism is the location of the Battle of Waterloo that took place
in 1815. The field where the battle took place is regarded as the most important example of battlefield
tourism; it continued to be a popular destination until the outbreak of WWI in 1914 and even today is
considered the second most important place in terms of its tourism potential (Seaton, 1999). Battlefield
tourism has grown in popularity, especially since WWI, with increased visits following the
establishment of monuments and museums in places where battles took place (Baldwin and Sharpley,
2009).
The phenomenon of battlefield tourism expresses an evaluation and presentation of battlefields in the
context of collective memory, memory that is then institutionalized through memorial ceremonies and
museums, which become tourism products for consumption purposes (Misztal, 2003). The generations
that followed WWI played a vital role in the commemoration of those who lost their lives as a result of
the war through the creation of a collective memory of the events of the past (Winter, 2009).
Accordingly, battlefields presented as cultural heritage sites for tourism purposes are also defined as
places that are visited in order to show respect to those who suffered and died during those conflicts
(Leopold, 2007).
Battlefield tourism is also considered a phenomenon that can create nationalistic feelings among
visitors from the nations that took part in the conflict (Prideaux, 2007). The tragic events of the past
have not only changed levels of understanding, acceptance and comprehension of the world, but also
the roles of individuals in their own lives, whilst at the same time reshaping the heritage of the cultures
and countries to which they belong (Leopold, 2007). In this context, as well as being attractive in a
national sense and at a cultural level, war memorials and museums can also become important at the
international level (Seaton, 1996).
An examination of the literature reveals a debate over whether visits to battlefields, evaluated in the
context of dark tourism, are made for religious or secular reasons (Stephens, 2014). In this context, the
development and growth of battlefield tourism suggests that such locations are considered sacred due
to their historical importance; consequently, they are invested with spirituality and can be regarded as
examples of cultural pilgrimage in a modern sense (Collins-Kreiner, 2010a; 2010b; 2016; Stone, 2005).
Thus, visits made by Australians and New Zealanders to the Gallipoli Peninsula every year are regarded
as part of the process of nation-state building and are invested with a symbolic spiritual value; this in
turn means it can be evaluated as a secular pilgrimage in a cultural sense (Hall, 2002; Kokkranikal et al.,
2015; Ryan, 2007a; Seaton, 2002).
Other destinations that are visited by tourists for the purpose of gaining experiences are the Pacific War
area (Cooper, 2006, Cooper, 2007), places where the Vietnam War took place (Henderson, 2000; Willis,
2014), locations that featured during WWI such as the Trentino region of Italy (Irimias, 2014), the
Somme and Ypres regions in France and Belgium, respectively (http://www.battlefields-tours.com/,
2015) and the Gallipoli Peninsula where the Dardanelles Campaign took place (Scates, 2002; Slade, 2003;
4
Aliağaoğlu, 2008; Hyde and Harman, 2011; Hall et al., 2010; Ozer et al., 2012). These constitute examples
of battlefield tourism that are significant at the international level. Battlefield tourism that has become
popular in the context of dark tourism has been examined by several authors from different
perspectives. While some of these studies put their focus on the supply-side (see Irimiás, 2014; Virgili et
al., 2018; Winter, 2011a), many of them strived to investigate the demand-side of different battlefield
landscapes (i.e. Bigley et al., 2010; Chen and Tsai, 2019; Miles, 2014). On the other hand, the vast majority
of studies have concentrated on the relationships between individuals and war-related areas, further
investigating the reasons people engage with such places (Iles, 2008), along with the impacts of
communities’ interpretations of such locations (Hurt, 2010; Knox, 2006). More importantly, it has been
found that there is a strong relationship between war-related sites and dark tourism (Gordon, 1998;
Johnston, 2011; Pieris, 2014; Smith, 1998); likewise, battlefield tourism creates positive economic impacts
for the host communities that organize commemorative events (Hall and Basarin, 2009).
Study Area
For the purpose of this study, the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical National Park was selected as the
research area. The Dardanelles-Gallipoli district, located in the Marmara region of Turkey, has
significant potential for battlefield tourism within the scope of the dark tourism phenomenon as it was
the location of several important WWI battles. Thanks to its historical and cultural aspects and tourism
potential, the region hosts tourists from all over the world every year. The Dardanelles Province and
Gallipoli Peninsula are primarily known as the place where an important WWI battle took place.
Soldiers from Australia and New Zealand also participated in this battle, fighting with the English and
French forces, and were known as “Anzacs” (Sackett, 1985; Scates, 2006).
During the war, of the 50,000 Australian soldiers who participated in the battle, 8,709 were killed and
18,235 wounded. The number of New Zealander soldiers killed totalled 2,701 with 4,880 wounded (Hall,
2002). The Ottoman army’s losses were reported as 57,000 (Yeneroğlu-Kutbay and Aykaç, 2016). The
British Empire’s purpose was to conquer Istanbul by spreading around the Dardanelles region with the
help of the Anzac soldiers, in order to strengthen the connection between France and England. A battle
took place on the Gallipoli Peninsula, which the Turkish army won (Aliağaoğlu, 2008; Cheal and Griffin,
2013; Hall, 2002; Piersig, 1994). This district is known for its many historical, cultural and tourism assets,
including several archaeological and historical sites, examples of civil architecture, and military,
administrative and industrial buildings (www.canakkalekulturturizm.gov.tr, 2016).
While the Dardanelles region is important for Turks, it also has a special importance for citizens of
Australia and New Zealand (Prideaux, 2007). Therefore, tourists from Australia and New Zealand come
to commemorate their relatives who lost their lives during the battle that took place there (Hyde and
Harman, 2011). Every year, hundreds of thousands of tourists visit the region, and commemoration
ceremonies are held for Anzac and Turkish people on different days (Stephens, 2014).
Since the battle, the 25th of April has been commemorated as Anzac Day, as it was the day when Anzac
troops arrived in the Gallipoli Peninsula; commemoration ceremonies are held for citizens of Australia
and New Zealand on that day (Graham, 2008; Hede and Hall, 2006; Wheatley and James, 2014). This
date and this place are psychologically important for Australians and New Zealanders as it is considered
to be the time and place when their respective nations were born (Donoghue and Tranter, 2015; Ozer,
Ersoy and Tuzunkan, 2012; Slade, 2003). Similarly, the victory won in this war is accepted as the starting
point of the Republic of Turkey’s process of becoming a nation state in the modern sense; consequently,
great importance is attributed to this battle (McKenna and Ward, 2007), visits are made by local tourists,
and commemoration ceremonies are held every year on the 18th of March.
5
The Gallipoli Peninsula has been turned into a national park, and after the signing of the Lausanne
Peace Treaty in particular, cemeteries, monuments, mausoleums and statues began to be built for those
who lost their lives (Dore, 2006). In addition, through a joint project developed by the governments of
Australia, New Zealand and Turkey, the site was renamed the “Gallipoli Peninsula Peace Park” (Catalca
and Yurtseven, 2003). The Gallipoli Peninsula is known as a popular destination attracting both
domestic and international tourists from all over the world, all year round. Dark tourism is especially
important in this context as such activities are conducted throughout the year (Kurnaz et al., 2013).
Methodology
In this study, qualitative research methodology was thought to be beneficial. A case study approach was
used as the qualitative research design. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews,
participant observation and written and visual documents related to the region, which were then
analysed through an inductive analysis.
Qualitative research methodology refers to an approach that allows people to examine their experiences
in depth by using specific research methods such as in depth-interviews, focus group discussions,
observation, content analysis, visual methods and life stories or biographies (Hennink et al., 2011).
Qualitative research methods, unlike quantitative methods, benefit different research strategies that
use various data collection techniques, analysis and interpretation based on distinct philosophical
assumptions (Creswell, 2009).
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with questions focusing on two important issues, in
accordance with the stated purpose of the research. These two issues centred around understanding
the participants’ motivations for visiting the region and the experiences they obtained from their visits.
1. What were (your) main motivations for visiting this site/region?
2. What were you most affected by during your visit? What were the most powerful elements that
made your visit memorable as a tourism experience?
Interviews were conducted with tourists that had participated in commemoration ceremonies held at
Dardanelles-Gallipoli between 24-26 April 2016 and between 7-10 August 2016.
Research Design, Data Collection and Data Analysis

In accordance with the purpose of the research, a qualitative research method was used. To begin, it is
appropriate to explain the reasons for this choice of method, as well as its type and characteristics.
In this study, face-to-face interviews, document analysis and participant observations were the data
sources used. The study utilized the snowball sampling technique as a purposeful sampling method in
order to obtain in-depth information regarding the phenomenon under investigation. During the
research phase, interviews were conducted with a total of 44 domestic and foreign tourists; three of
these interviews were conducted over the telephone while one participant preferred to take part by
answering the questions via e-mail. The rest were conducted face-to-face. Another participant did not
consent to the use of voice recording devices, and so their answers were recorded in writing only.
Data obtained from this study were analysed through an inductive content analysis. The concepts that
emerged were sorted into themes, which were then divided into meaningful categories. The data was
then transcribed from audio recordings into written text and a coding process was implemented. For
better understanding and interpretation, this was supported with direct quotations.
6
Information regarding the Study Group

The participants consisted of 25 men and 19 women, while 28 of them were international tourists and
16 were domestic tourists. 35 of the participants were visiting the site for the first time, six were making
a second visit, two were visiting for the fifth time while the remaining participants stated simply that
they had visited the site more than once. The countries of origin of the tourists in the study were
Australia (21), the Republic of Turkey (13), New Zealand (2), England, UK (2), Germany (2), Belgium (1),
Canada (1), Portugal (1) and Scotland, UK (1) (see Table 1).
Table 1. Demographic data for participants

Country of Frequency of
Participant Age Gender Occupation Nationality
Residence Visit
P1 60-65 E Chef AU AU 1
P2 30 K Radiographer AU UK 1
P3 26 K Retail AU UK 1
P4 27 E Engineer AU UK 1
P5 28 E Pharmacist AU AU 1
P6 40-45 K Volunteer AU AU 1
Educator
P7 87 E Retired UK UK 2
P8 23 E Life Saver AU AU 1
P9 24 K Logistics AU AU 1
P10 29 K Teacher AU AU 1
P11 35 E Film Producer AU UK 1
P12 26 K Environmental AU AU 1
Advisor
P13 28 E Marine AU AU 1
Engineer
P14 72 E Retired AU AU 1
P15 67 E Retired AU AU 1
P16 58 E Manager SCOTLAND AU 1
P17 45 E Civil Servant PORTUGAL PORTUGAL 1
P18 29 K Medical AU UK 1
Scientist
P19 55 K Housekeeping AU AU 1
P20 50-55 E Retired AU AU 1
P21 39 E Travel Agent UK UK 1
P22 24 K Finance AU UK 2
P23 26 K Unemployed CANADA CANADA 2
P24 30 K Civil Servant NZ UK 1
P25 25 E Engineer AU UK 1
P26 28 K Radiation AU UK 1
Therapist
P27 27 K Unemployed NZ NZ 1
P28 25 K Health Sector AU UK 1
7
Country of Frequency of
Participant Age Gender Occupation Nationality
Residence Visit
P29 44 E Treasury and TURKEY TURKEY 2
Credit Risk
Manager
P30 60 E Worker TURKEY BELGIUM 1
P31 39 E Artist/Director TURKEY TURKEY 5
P32 33 K Sales Chef TURKEY TURKEY 1
P33 35 E Representative TURKEY TURKEY 1
P34 33 E Chef TURKEY TURKEY More than 1
P35 44 E Civil Engineer TURKEY TURKEY 1
P36 35 K Housewife TURKEY GERMANY 1
P37 37 E Driver TURKEY GERMANY 1
P38 29 E Teacher TURKEY TURKEY 2
P39 56 K Retired TURKEY TURKEY 1
P40 53 K Housewife TURKEY TURKEY 1
P41 56 K Teacher TURKEY TURKEY 5
P42 33 E Self- TURKEY TURKEY 2
employment
P43 29 E Worker TURKEY TURKEY 1
P44 35 E Director TURKEY TURKEY 1
Reliability of the Research

In order to increase the internal reliability of the study, the process of data coding was conducted by
two researchers. After the coding process was complete, the coefficient of consistency was calculated
using Kappa analyses. The arithmetical average of the Kappa coefficient was found to be 77.8%, which
proved that consistency was at a significant level. In order to ensure the external reliability of the study,
all of the data collection tools, raw data, coding, interview and observation notes were submitted for
supervision and confirmation by an independent expert.
Voice recording was used during the interviews and the recordings were then transcribed into written
text. The next phase involved analysing the transcriptions through an inductive content analysis. The
data coding process was conducted by two researchers, after which, two main themes - motivation and
experience - and supporting categories were obtained.
Findings
An analysis of the data revealed that the participants who visited the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical
National Park were influenced by different types of motivational factors, both pull and push. The
motivations of both domestic and international visitors reveal differences between them, but also some
similarities.
Upon examination, the findings of this study show that the factors that motivate tourists to visit the
Gallipoli Peninsula can be grouped in two categories, namely push and pull motivational factors. These
categories consist of nine themes between them. The themes in the pull motivational factors category
are: education/learning, history knowledge/awareness, participation in commemoration event and
becoming a nation state and cultural identity. The push motivational factors category, on the other hand,
include: family ties, curiosity, patriotism, desire to know a different culture, media and reference group.
8
When the motivations of the participants are evaluated, it is clear that they consist of both push and
pull motivation factors.
Just as with the dark tourism motivations of tourists visiting this area, it emerged that the experiences
of the tourists in this study have some differences and similarities according to their nationalities. The
findings could be grouped into two categories, psychological and socio-cultural experiences, with six
different themes included in these categories. The psychological experiences category consists of four
themes, namely, emotional experience, sadness, developing empathy, and memorable tourism experience,
while the socio-cultural experiences category consists of two themes, namely, learning/understanding
history and nation-state consciousness and cultural identity. In the following section, the motivation
and experience themes and categories that emerged are explained under these headings with direct
quotations from interviewees.
Motivations of Tourists visiting Dardanelles

While dark tourism motivations may depend upon the reasons of individual tourists, at the same time
they can be explained by the characteristics of the destination (Isaac and Çakmak, 2013). The findings
of this study show that the motivations for visiting battlefields in the Gallipoli Peninsula are
heterogeneous. It emerged that the participants visited the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical National Park
due to both push and pull motivational factors.
Pull Motivational Factors

Education/Learning
Education is seen as one of the motivations tourists have for visiting places where tragic and often
violent incidents have taken place (Cohen, 2011; Farmaki, 2013; Preece and Price, 2005). Similarly,
education comes to the fore in the literature, as the most important motivational factor for visiting
battlefields (Baldwin and Sharpley, 2009; Henderson, 2000; Leopold, 2007). Education emerged as a
sub-theme of the motivational factors held by several of the local tourists that participated in this study,
as seen in the opinions below:
Dardanelles martyrs’ cemetery is a place I wanted to see, definitely. Here are my daughters,
I took them along for them to see under what conditions this country was established, how
people lost their lives in order to save this country, what kind of events took place […]
Children too… we are lucky for this matter, we want them to know that. That’s why we came
here. (Participant 29)
Actually, we come here with our children. We want to tell our children what happened here,
impress the spirit of this place upon them to some extent… (Participant 35)
[…] we came out to teach our volunteers about the Gallipoli campaign. (Participant 6)
Education, the most important motivation factor for visiting battlefields, can also be considered the
most important source of motivation for the Gallipoli Peninsula, which is a typical example of a
battlefield destination. This is supported by previous studies (Dunkley et al., 2011; Kokkranikal et al.,
2015; Winter, 2011b).
Knowledge/Consciousness of History
The historical value of the Gallipoli Peninsula is important for both sides in the conflict, Turks,
Australians and New Zealanders, in different ways (Prideaux, 2007). As WWI came to an end, Turks,
Australians and New Zealanders gained recognition as their respective homes became nation states; this
9
emphasizes the importance of the historical interest in the region as it symbolises, to a certain extent,
the beginning of a new historical era. In terms of its historic importance on an international level, it is
one of most visited battlefields in Europe (West, 2008). In this context, consciousness and knowledge
of the historic significance of the location, and a desire to increase their knowledge, was another
exogenous motivational component for both domestic and international tourists, as can be seen in the
participants’ statements below.
Definitely historical. Leading role [motivation] is historical. A war took place here; to relive
those days, our elders becoming martyrs here, riding my bicycle here, this was my aim.
These were the reasons I had. These made me come to Dardanelles and stay in Dardanelles.
Not really for a touristic purpose. (Participant 38)
[…] Nowadays, nationalistic feelings are no longer prominent. They [the new generation]
are not brought up with these feelings. We wanted them to get a feel for that era a little bit,
feel some things about our country, and remember these things when they are growing up.
Maybe we do not feel the history of our country, under what circumstances it was
established, how valuable it is, that it is as valuable now as it was in the past. We should
feel it a little bit now, as should they. (Participant 35)
The independence of Turkey, our martyrs. Because it is important in a historical sense.

(Participant 36)
Conscious visits to this place are an important experience for understanding history, for
drawing lessons from history. (Participant 31)
[…] the history, and also I think most Australians having the opportunity to go to Gallipoli.
It's just very important […] I want to know about history. (Participant 1)
I think to learn, to learn more. I’ve learned so much about history, … (Participant 9)
just because of our history - our war history and those that gave everything years ago for
our freedom…I just wanted to see where it was… and what it was [in the past]... (Participant
15)
[…] definitely history and Anzac Dawn Service. (Participant 27)
[…] because I love history and military history also attracts me … (Participant 17)
After evaluating the participants’ opinions on the knowledge/consciousness of history motivation, it

can be said that one of the motivations of both domestic and international tourists for visiting this
region emerges as a desire to gain historical knowledge and develop historical consciousness by
travelling to sites where incidents occurred in the past (Kokkranikal et al., 2015; Preece and Price, 2005).
It is possible to attribute this to the Turkish Australian, and New Zealander tourists who visit the region.
Participation in Commemoration Ceremonies

Another factor that has been suggested as the most important motivation for visiting battlefields in the
context of dark tourism is a desire to participate in commemoration ceremonies (Baldwin and Sharpley,
2009). Ceremonies that commemorate those who lost their lives on the battlefield are held at
10
mausoleums that were built after the battle with the purpose of strengthening national identity or
remembering the establishment of a nation state, as well as, of course, to remember and pay respect to
previous generations who lost their lives there (Farmaki, 2013; Hyde and Harman, 2011; Kokkranikal et
al., 2015).
Just the feel of the place, such active emotions, and obviously the commemoration … For us,
it is like pilgrimage for Australians to go there and do the remembrance… So we go there
and we remember the exmodalized the victory… (Participant 4)
Anzac Day - the services at Gallipoli […] to pay tribute to the fallen soldiers in the past.
(Participant 5)
So, main reason to come to Anzac is because we celebrate Anzac Day every year in
Australia… (Participant 13)
[…] to commemorate our soldiers [in] the ceremony … (Participant 16)
I’m here to experience what other Australians have done before me. So, it’s something that
every young Australian wants to do and I think needs to do, so that’s my motivation for
coming over here and witnessing what happened and experiencing things first hand.
(Participant 11)
[…] to commemorate everything they did for us.… (Participant 22)
From the participants’ opinions given above, it is clear that many of the participants were visiting the
region with the primary motivation of attending and/or wanting to experience the ceremony organized
for Anzac soldiers. It can also be said that the reasons for this motivation are the spiritual feelings of
the Australian tourists towards the memory of Anzac soldiers who lost their lives during the war, and
the respect and gratitude they feel towards them. In this context, the views expressed above by the
participants in terms of their motivations for joining commemoration activities are supportive of the
thesis put forward by related studies that argue this is one of the real motivations of Australian and New
Zealander tourists visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula (Dore, 2006; Hall et al., 2010; Prideaux, 2007; Ryan,
2007b).
Becoming a Nation State and Cultural Identity

National identity and culture consciousness have emerged as another motivational component in this
study. As indicated in previous sections, after WWI, the Gallipoli Peninsula became important for
Australians and New Zealanders in the context of becoming a nation state and consequently, gaining
national identity; the Gallipoli Peninsula is equally important for Turks for similar reasons (Basarin et
al., 2010).
So, after the World War, we [had] just been born as a nation. So, we were 1901; so, Gallipoli
was 15 years later; so it was very early for us. So yes, it is like the birth of a national identity…
(Participant 4)
It [Gallipoli] is a big part of our national identity. (Participant 25)
11
Another motivation of the participants for visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula refers to the emergence of
the nation state and cultural identity. The opinions stated by the participants regarding this aspect of
their history shows that the establishment of their nation state and the consequent development of a
cultural identity, and the role of the battle in that process, makes the battlefields of the Gallipoli
Peninsula important places for Australians and New Zealanders (Hall et al., 2010; Slade, 2003). Another
important point to be emphasized is that for Australians and New Zealanders who visit the region in a
secular rather than a religious context, it is seen as a cultural and historical pilgrimage (Basarin et al.
2010). The statements of some of the participants seem to support this.
[…] Muslims have Mecca. We have Gallipoli. (Participant 1)
It is not religious for us. […] It is something different […] It is a part of Australian history.
So, it is a historical pilgrimage. […] And maybe that’s what pilgrimage is. It is a historical
pilgrimage; it is the birth of our identities as Australians. And for New Zealanders, the same.
It is how we express ourselves. (Participant 4)
[…] there is no pilgrimage in the religious sense at all. (Participant 21)
The views of the participants who see their visits to the battlefields of the Gallipoli Peninsula as a secular
pilgrimage due to the symbolic importance of the war for the formation of their nation state and the
development of their cultural identity are supported by other research (Hall, 2002; Hyde and Harman,
2011; Kokkranikal et al. 2015; Seaton, 2002). The importance attributed by Australian and New Zealander
tourists to the Gallipoli Peninsula may also be explained by the interpretations of different groups or
persons in terms of the spiritual qualities of the region (Foley and Lennon, 1996a). As a result, when the
travel motivations of Australian, New Zealander and domestic tourists to the region are examined, the
symbolic value of the region is observed to arise mostly from the fact that each of these countries
became nation states after the battle took place (Ryan and Cave, 2007; Yeneroğlu-Kutbay and Aykaç,
2016). Visits made to the region are being shaped by the motivation to strengthen one’s national identity
(Farmaki, 2013).
Push Motivational Factors

Family Ties
Previous studies have indicated that motivations to visit the Gallipoli Peninsula depend upon several
factors, one of which relates to relationship ties between tourists and individuals who lost their lives
during the battle (Hyde and Harman, 2011). It is clear that this motivational factor constitutes one of
the sources of motivation among the visitors who participated in this study.
I am, of course, interested [in] where my father fought. Yeah, it is a family member… My
father, although he fought the Turks, was very respectful of them… We’ve tried to follow
where they went, where they fought and those that were killed. We’ve visited their graves.
(Participant 7)
[…] main reason, I think, that motivated me to come to Istanbul and Turkey is because of
the Anzacs, because I’ve got my grandfather… he fought for Australia and then I’ve got lots
of great, great uncles that fought in Gallipoli. (Participant 18)
12
[…] I wanted to come here because our great-grandfather was martyred here. […] Actually I
couldn’t find his grave but I would like to think, imagine and feel how they fought here, I
mean. I came for this reason. (Participant 38)
[…] My grandfather also participated in that war. He used to tell us he had fought in this
battle… Since those were our feelings since childhood, I wanted to see this place.
(Participant 39)
When these statements are considered, it is clear that having family members who were involved in the
war is a decisive motivational factor for visiting the region (Kokkranikal et al., 2015). An examination of
the countries of origin of the participants who expressed this motivation for visiting the region reveals
that they were all citizens of either Turkey, England or Australia; this is an important point to note.
Curiosity
Another motivation for visiting battlefields, which arises alongside empathy, is curiosity (Isaac and
Çakmak, 2013; Ryan, 2007b). Curiosity emerged as another motivational component in this study.
It was for travel. I was wondering about this place (Gallipoli Peninsula). My friends also
suggested it. So, we went for a few days. (Participant 32)
Because of curiosity… My brother-in-law also came here. Some of my friends also came.
They told me, “You should come and visit”. (Participant 37)
People are curious about how the Dardanelles War broke out. People are curious. I mean,
how did our elders go [to fight]? People are curious about how it really happened, how it
ended, how they fought. They would like to see [the location] for real. I also came to see it
for real. (Participant 43)
[Just curious about the history] interest [in] the history, in this case it was [the] Gallipoli
battle … (Participant 17)
In the context of dark tourism and visits to places where many people have died, the literature reveals
that curiosity is often highlighted as the main motivation source (Isaac and Çakmak, 2013; Ryan, 2007b).
However, this motivational factor has not emerged in previous studies of battlefield tourism, which is a
form of dark tourism. Slade (2003) and Hall et al. (2010) argue that the motivation sources of tourists
that visit the Gallipoli Peninsula do not arise from curiosity; on the contrary, these places are visited
because they carry symbolic value as a place where nation states were born. Yet, in this study, curiosity
was mentioned by one of the participants as their motivation for visiting the region.
Patriotism
The Gallipoli Peninsula, a site of historical importance, is known among Turks, Australians and New
Zealanders as a place that has spiritual value as it constitutes the beginning of the formation of their
respective nation state identities (Ryan, 2007a). Although on the losing side, participation in annual
commemoration ceremonies has symbolic value for Australians and New Zealanders, as it does for
Turks, who were on the winning side (Prideaux, 2007). The data obtained from the interviews in this
study revealed a motivation for visiting the region for the purpose of commemoration for Australians,
whereas for local tourists, they were commemorating those who lost their lives during the war. This
13
motivation to visit martyrdoms and mausoleums, which are regarded as sacred, can be explained in
relation to the concept of patriotism.
Patriotism, the history… (Participant 1)

Patriotism and just kind of respect, the Australian history… (Participant 2)
Patriotism. And I think it’s something that everyone, every Australian should do to come
here and to see how hard it was for the men and all of that. (Participant 3)
Patriotism, and to pay tribute to the fallen soldiers in the past... (Participant 5)
[…] it is a family member; patriotism and we’re interested in both. (Participant 7)
The concept of patriotism as a direct reason for travelling to the region was primarily mentioned by the
Australian participants. The most important aspect of this patriotism that emerged were references to
the heroism of those who lost their lives fighting for their country during the war (Kokkranikal et al.,
2015; Ryan, 2007a).
Desire to know a different culture

The desire to know different cultures emerges as a factor in the motivation to travel to places where
battles have taken place for tourists interested in battlefield tourism, in the context of dark tourism
(Bigley et al., 2010). This factor, the desire to know a different culture, was mentioned by the participants
of this study, particularly the Australian participants, in relation to their motivations for visiting the
Gallipoli Peninsula.
Obviously I’ve seen a lot of pictures, and umm it just looks like an amazing place, and just
experiencing another culture. (Participant 18)
[…] Culture, something different and Anzac Day. (Participant 3)
[…] So, I would say that, it is particularly related to Gallipoli. If you would say like Istanbul,
I would say that we wanted to go to Istanbul because of the culture. So, we wanted to
experience the Turkish culture. (Participant 4)
Unlike some of the other motivational factors discussed, this motivational factor emerged, not as a
motivation to travel for its own sake, but rather as one of several motivational factors mentioned by the
participants. This was often because several of the international participants’ visits included not only a
visit to the Gallipoli Peninsula, but also touristic trips to other parts of the country, sometimes before
visiting this region and attending the commemoration ceremony and sometimes afterwards.
Media
The role of the media in the formation of tourists’ motivations to visit destinations developed alongside
its role in the emergence and development of the concept of dark tourism; roles which also, as stated in
previous sections, emerged in this study (Foley and Lennon, 1996a; Seaton, 2002; Sharpley, 2005). In
this context, it can be said that the media played a role in creating and encouraging both the push and
pull motivational factors for visiting the battlefields located at the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical
National Park among the tourists in this study. The media sources in question include traditional media
channels as well as some popular social media outlets that have emerged with the development of
technology. The findings of the research have revealed the different ways in which the media influenced
the travel motivations of the tourists visiting the region, as seen in their statements.
14
I would have to go and say social media. ‘[…] but also what we were taught in school…
(Participant 1)
Internet. Yeah! Social media. (Participant 5)
Of course. We can say. Because of the 100th Anniversary there was the Russell Crowe movie
[…] Therefore, for the 100th Anniversary celebration showing in [the] mass media there was
a lot about Gallipoli … (Participant 21)
In Turkey… there was a broadcast about the renovation of monuments and memorials in
this area and an initiative to increase awareness of it. After I watched it, I was very
impressed. (Participant 30)
[…] Social media is everywhere […] Particularly when we were passing Gökçeada it was very
effective. Suggestions there: recommendations such as ‘you should come and stay here […]
don’t go before seeing that’ were effective. (Participant 34)
It was effective. There is a Gallipoli movie. You are impressed when you watch it. How did
they fight, with what weapons did they fight?… A different feeling. Very different…
(Participant 37)
[…] I always thought about coming to Dardanelles […] But I think I watched all the movies.
Movies have motivated me more than other things. (Participant 38)
In light of the statements provided above, it is clear that the findings support the view that the media
has a very important role in the process of disseminating information about the region, which
strengthens both domestic and international tourists’ motivations for visiting the region. This concurs
with the findings of other studies and demonstrates that the media has a significant impact on dark
tourism motivations (Foley and Lennon, 1996a, 1996b; Yuill, 2003).
Reference Group
Some of the participants who visited the Gallipoli Peninsula mentioned that another factor that helped
generate the motivation to travel to the area was propaganda through word-of-mouth from reference
groups (relatives, friends, etc.).
I have friends who have been here before and they said that there were very pleasant and
emotional things… (Participant 27)
[…] Mainly, Mom and Dad … (Participant 3)
A lot of friends influenced us. They’ve been here before. We’ve had friends been here before
and they have encouraged us to come … (Participant 8)
Social media didn’t have any role in us coming here. […] Friends, family… (Participant 19)
Family and friends. The main effective factor was family and friends sharing stories with us
about their visits to the region. (Participant 32)
15
[…] There was no specific thing affecting me apart from our friends who came here before.
We know that they were impressed as well… (Participant 35)
Following an evaluation of the statements above, it is possible to say that information obtained from
close reference groups (relatives, friends, etc.) who had already visited the region played an effective
role in generating a motivation to visit the Gallipoli Peninsula among the participants. This suggests
that although the media can be an effective factor in generating travel motivations, reference groups
can also impact people’s motivations to visit tourism destinations (Kaya, 2006; Murphy et al., 2007).
Tourism Experiences of Tourists Visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula

Alongside dark tourism motivations, the experiences of tourists to this region were also examined in
this study, and revealed similarities and differences according to the nationalities of the participants.
Dark tourism, in terms of the experiences it provides, differs from other cultural experiences
(Yeneroğlu-Kutbay and Aykaç, 2016). The findings of this study are set forth in two categories,
psychological and socio-cultural experiences; within those categories are included six different themes.
The psychological experiences category consists of four themes, namely emotional experience, sadness,
developing empathy and memorable tourism experience. The socio-cultural experiences category consists
of two themes, namely learning/understanding history and nation-state consciousness and cultural
identity.
Psychological Experiences
Emotional Experience
In this first category, the emotional aspect of the experiences that the participants had during their
visits emerged as the sub-theme most frequently mentioned by the participants. The experiences of
both domestic and international tourists of visiting the site were similar and included emotional
reflections upon the war that took place there.
There was information between the lines of the books we read, but the things that were told
[to] us by the tour guides during our tour […] knowing those [things] affect people more […]
Therefore, when you look at it from our point of view, from my country’s point of view-
stepping outside the historical reality- my feelings come into prominence. (Participant 29)
When you visit the region without other visitors, it is really very impressive… (Participant
31)
There are really many impressive things […] I can say that self-devotion was the emotion
that was mostly felt, [that] emerged as a prominent concept here… Of course there is an
emotional part to this war. (Participant 35)
It is completely different. You turn the clock back. You feel that you lived those events. It is
a completely different thing. It is an effect which is more emotional. (Participant 36)
[…] It was very similar but you just don’t get the same sense that you do here, it's a bit more
touching. It’s like really, really moving. (Participant 18)
I think the factor of services at Dawn is quite emotional. Because as they [are] doing the
speeches in the presentations, [it] is very, very dramatic. (Participant 21)
16
[…] they’re very emotional. It’s very hard to comprehend some of the, you know, the details
and the graves and things like that. Makes you feel like a bit teary … (Participant 2)
The participants’ statements concerning their experiences of visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula battlefields
suggest that both the domestic and international tourists had similar emotional experiences. These
findings provide further evidence of the emotional experience characteristic indicated in the literature
on dark tourism experiences (Kang et al., 2012; Yeneroğlu-Kutbay and Aykaç, 2016).
Sadness
The second most-frequently expressed effect, after emotional, described by the participants who visited
the Gallipoli Peninsula battlefields, was sadness. In this study, it became clear that the experiences of
both domestic and international tourists were solemn as most of the feelings expressed by them were
negative.
Very emotional, sad, sadness, yeah, I think. (Participant 1)

Sadness and pride! Sad, because so many people died and they were young but pride because
they kept fighting, they didn’t give up. (Participant 3)
[…] it’s quite sad to think, like how many lives were lost… (Participant 18)
A lot of sadness, with all the lives that were lost … (Participant 19)
How sad it was for Australians? (Participant 20)
[…] When I visited the martyrs’ cemeteries and thought about the people who lost their lives
for their country, I felt sad… (Participant 38)
The experiences gained by both the domestic and international participants during their visits to the
area were solemn; this is a second sub-theme that emerged during the course of the research. The most
important factors that generate this sadness are tourists’ perceptions of the area as it is presented to
them and their emotional interpretation of the site (Miles, 2002).
Developing Empathy
Developing empathy is another factor that gives form to the experiences of visitors to the Gallipoli
Peninsula Battlefields. This factor became prominent in the study, either directly or indirectly, as
another experience component gained by the participants during their visits. As well as asking questions
with the aim of understanding their experiences of visiting the area, the study also asked “Can a sense
of developing empathy explain your feelings?” The participants’ comments were:
Of course! Feelings of empathy […] We all read, heard about it in books, and we were always
told to see this for real […] Again, we received some information from our guide but it is a
very different feeling to seeing the places where the events took place… (Participant 29)
Yes, we can say that. We can say that it is empathy. We can say that we developed empathy.
We can say that this means to live that moment by going back to the past and to put
ourselves in their place. (Participant 38)
[…] It created an impression that people fought for their country in the past with their hearts
and souls. I felt empathy. (Participant 30)
You really get very affected […] Our lives are easy but if you think about how they lived in
the past, your mind is blown. (Participant 37)
17
[…] the emotion I felt at the ceremony […] trying to convey the difficulties that these, these
soldiers - these soldiers faced… (Participant 16)
Just how big the space was and how hilly it was and just looking at perspectives from both
sides… (Participant 9)
[…] I mean it’s quite surreal seeing all the trenches, and everything like that, and it’s quite
sad to think, like how many lives were lost […] Turks, Australians, New Zealanders. But I
think the most important thing that I got from the whole experience was that… (Participant
18)
I think it was just an overall surreal experience actually being back where all that happened
so long ago. And just trying to imagine what it would have been like, and I was just camping
out in the area as well experiencing the cold and being without everyday things that we take
for granted. (Participant 26)
Developing empathy is generally known as one of the motivational factors of those interested in dark
tourism (Ryan, 2007b). In this study, it also has the characteristic of being a component that emerged
under the experience theme. Developing empathy was put forward as an emotion expressed directly by
domestic visitors and as an experience factor expressed indirectly by international tourists. Developing
empathy, in the context of dark tourism, is an element that can be formed when comments are made
by tourists about areas they visit and museums in those areas (Miles, 2002). As a result, it can be said
that the empathy developed towards the area of the Gallipoli Peninsula battlefields by tourists appeared
as a reflection of the interaction process and a product of the psychological process (Sharpley and Stone,
2009; Stone, 2009).
Memorable Tourism Experiences

Another important sub-theme that emerged from the findings is the memorable tourism experience as
a form of emotional experiences. The tourism experiences that relate to this sub-theme came into
prominence most significantly in replies to the question “Which were the factors that made your visit
memorable?”, in quite different ways depending on whether they were domestic or international
tourists. The participants made the following statements about the emotions obtained and those that
were imprinted most strongly in their memories following their visits to the battlefields of the Gallipoli
Peninsula.
[…] there was one very memorable one. It was from a Turkish soldier. And the Turkish
soldier he wrote a letter to his mother and father. Look after my wife, look after my child…
very emotional. (Participant 1)
Gallipoli is a memorable experience. I would just tell particularly about Gallipoli, about the
emotions and the remembrance. (Participant 4)
Just how big the space was and how hilly it was and just looking at perspectives from both
sides … (Participant 9)
…to be honest we all sort of felt that the New Zealand ceremony was very, very touching.
Had lot of cultural events, had lot of singing and the haka at the end was just unbelievable…
(Participant 10)
18
…the memorable spots up at Gallipoli and the wonderful people of Istanbul and here
[Gallipoli] will all stay in our minds forever I think. (Participant 19)
I think the New Zealand service. It was magical, powerful, humbling, moving, inspiring.
(Participant 21)
In my opinion, what Atatürk had said in memory of Anzac soldiers [that is written] on our
monument is very important. (Participant 29)
The martyrs’ cemetery, for example, is an unforgettable memory for me… (Participant 32)
Actually, what we were told here made it unforgettable… So what we were told by friends,
people here strengthened the impression on us… (Participant 35)
Martyrdom is always on my mind. Our people, who gave their lives, sacrificed [their lives]
and so our ancestors should not be forgotten. One must see and feel here… (Participant 39)
Prayer Bastion. The short films shown there and their sounds impressed us a lot. I can never
forget it (Participant 36)
In light of the statements above, it can be said that the elements that made their experiences memorable
were the feelings that their visits to the area evoked in them. The tourists who participated in the study
stated that the touristic elements that evoked particularly strong feelings were the monuments, martyrs’
cemeteries, inscriptions and memorials located at the site.
Socio-Cultural Experiences
Learning/Understanding History
In previous sections, interest or curiosity in history and learning history were the most important
motivation given for travelling to destinations related to dark tourism (Kokkranikal et al., 2015; Preece
and Price, 2005). The findings of this study demonstrate that learning and understanding history are at
the forefront of the experiences gained by both local and foreign tourists visiting the Gallipoli Peninsula
battlefields, as the participants discussed the films and documentaries they watched during the
commemoration ceremony and the historical memorials and inscriptions they saw at the site.
Yeah, history and where actually things happened and why they happened. Because we only
seem to get taught a very brief history … (Participant 2)
[…] I’ve learned so much. About history, yeah, it’s really changed my perspective on it.
(Participant 9)
[…] we watched a lot of documentaries about this site…I think [they] gave us a really deep
understanding of what happened here. (Participant 6)
[…] I think it just gives you a better understanding of the whole situation… (Participant 15)
[…] I think it gave me a deeper understanding of that history […] we went to the Turkish
memorial, and we went to the 57th Regiment Memorial. So, it’s just understanding the
impact that the war had on both countries. (Participant 16)
The documentaries were very important. They gave me more knowledge, and a more, bigger
understanding of the war … (Participant 1)
19
[…] If made consciously, visits to this place are important experiences in order to
understand the history and to take lessons from it. (Participant 31)
I can say that our bonds with history are tighter now. It has strengthened our ties with the
past (Participant 34)
An examination of the views of the participants reveals that a consciousness has been formed to an
important extent in terms of providing historical information to visitors interested in history. An
impression was also gained from the face-to-face interviews with the participants that they were given
important historical knowledge during the visit. Undoubtedly, the role of the tours led by guides should
be seen as another important aspect of visitors’ learning and understanding history.
Nation-State Consciousness and Cultural Identity

Another experience dimension derived from the data obtained in this study is nation-state
consciousness and cultural identity. This was mentioned by the study’s participants as one of the factors
that formed their travel motivations. The symbolic value of the Gallipoli Peninsula battlefields for
citizens of both Australia and New Zealand is the acquisition of a cultural identity that was formed
during the processes in which their respective nations became nation states (Slade, 2003). In this
context, the main elements that make visiting the site meaningful for Australians and New Zealanders
are the nation-state consciousness and cultural identity components.
I always wanted to explore what people meant by the Anzac spirit and I think coming here,
we got a real good understanding what it meant to be an Anzac and how that helped us to
develop as a nation. (Participant 10)
[…] you know it’s got to do with freedom, liberty and our national identity. (Participant 4)
[…] I think it’s worth it to celebrate this kind of key point in the history of a nation - it should
not be forgotten. (Participant 17)
[…] What we call our country’s defence was achieved through the sacrificing of lives.
Actually, this is the most impressive part. You can see what kinds of things people sacrificed
in order to defend this country and freedom… (Participant 35)
When these views are taken into consideration, the importance of the Gallipoli Peninsula battlefields
for Turkish, Australian and New Zealander tourists comes to the forefront as a location that was
significant in the formation of their respective nation states and cultural identities. This finding concurs
with the results of previous studies (Basarin et al., 2010; Donoghue and Tranter, 2015; Prideaux, 2007;
Yeneroğlu-Kutbay and Aykaç, 2016).
Conclusion
An examination of the travel motivations and experiences of tourists who have visited the battlefields
located at the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical National Park has revealed that there are similarities and
differences according to the nationalities of the visitors. Although these findings concur with the
findings of previous studies, they also include results that reflect the uniqueness of the study’s context.
While dark tourism motivations may depend on tourists own personal reasons for visiting a destination,
they can also be explained with reference to the special characteristics of the destination in question
(Isaac and Çakmak, 2013). Research has shown that tourists’ motivations for visiting the battlefields of
20
the Gallipoli Peninsula have a heterogeneous structure. The analysis undertaken in this study has
revealed that the participants visited the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical National Park due to different
types of push and pull motivational factors. While the motivations of both the domestic and
international visitors who participated in this study had some similar characteristics, there were also
some key differences. The factors that motivate tourists visiting the site in the context of dark tourism
can be grouped into three categories, namely, push, pull and both push and pull motivational factors.
In this context, motivations can be grouped into two categories and ten themes. The themes included
in the attracting motivational factors category are: education/learning, history knowledge/
consciousness, participating in a commemoration ceremony and becoming a nation state and cultural
identity. In the push motivational category, there are the following themes: family ties, curiosity,
patriotism, desire to know a different culture, media and reference group. It is clear that both internal
and external motivational factors affected both the domestic and international tourists who participated
in this study, in their visits to the region.
The experiences of tourists who have visited the region in question show similarities and differences in
terms of dark tourism motivations, according to their nationalities. Dark tourism differs from other
cultural experiences in terms of the experiences it offers (Yeneroğlu-Kutbay and Aykaç, 2016). The
findings obtained in the study were grouped into two categories, known as psychological experiences
and socio-cultural experiences, with several different themes included in these categories. The
psychological experiences category included four themes: emotional experience, sadness, developing
empathy and memorable tourism experience. The socio-cultural experiences category included two
themes: learning/understanding history and nation-state consciousness and cultural identity.
Curiosity and a desire to know different cultures were stated as travel motivations by the participants in
this study; this differs from the results obtained from similar studies. The most significant travel
motivations mentioned by the Turkish participants were education/learning and knowledge
/consciousness of history, whereas for the Australian and New Zealander tourists, participation in
commemoration ceremony was the most important motivational factor. This is in line with the findings
of other studies conducted examining the motivations of tourists from Australia and New Zealand
(Hyde and Harman, 2011; Lagos et al., 2015; Prideaux, 2007).
When the tourism experiences of the participants are evaluated, it is clear that the most significant
common aspect of their experiences was the emotional and saddening impact of their visits. In other
words, the experiences that visitors have are formed by their psychological and emotional interactions
with the locations visited, including those where commemoration ceremonies are held (Cohen, 2011).
The experiences that the participants had during their visits may be impacted by either their individual
psychological characteristics or socio-cultural characteristics. In addition, the historical and cultural
characteristics of the destination are important. For Australian and New Zealander tourists,
participation in commemoration ceremonies emerged as an important ritual for their understanding of
their own cultural identity. This is similar to the experiences of Turkish people visiting the site.
Another aspect was revealed as making the experiences of both domestic and international tourists who
visit the Gallipoli Peninsula battlefields impressive, namely, the authentic design of the site and the
importance of the places open to tourists. In this context, visits to the site area in question, visitors’
interpretations of the site during and after commemoration ceremonies, their interactions with the
knowledge gained during the visit, and the development of their learning level and environmental
21
perception lead to positive experiences. These findings are supportive of other studies in the literature
(Chang, 2014).
Another important finding of the study is that both conventional and social media have an effect on
tourists’ motivations to visit the site in question, acting as a push factor. Other studies have
demonstrated how media and information acquired before visiting a tourism site play a decisive role in
the experiences of some visitors (Liyanage et al., 2015; Yuill, 2003).
When the motivations and experiences of tourists who visit the Gallipoli Peninsula battlefields were
examined, it is clear that they were in line with other studies carried out on special interest tourism that
mostly depends on culture (Kozak and Bahçe, 2012; McKercher, 2002; Minic, 2012). It was also observed
that the participants reflected a multi-purpose cultural type of tourist rather than simply a cultural
tourist type.
The findings from the study show that the battlefields located at the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical
National Park can be categorized as the “darkest” type of dark tourism, according to Stone’s (2006) dark
tourism shading scheme. In this context, the authentic positioning of the site, its high political effect
and ideology, the fact that it is education-focused and history-centred, and is seen as authentic, as well
as the fact that visits to the site tend to be of a short duration, the site is not oriented towards supply
and has less infrastructure were all supported by the findings obtained from the participant
observations.
In terms of experience types, the dimensions of the experiences that the visitors had can be said to be
closer to the emotional and informative experience category. This supports the emotional and
informative experiences approach developed by Aho (2001). The study also revealed that the experiences
the participants had during their visits included some of the positive and negative characteristics
proposed by Pearce and Caltabiano’s concept of experience components (1983). While the sadness
expressed by the participants was primarily seen as a negative emotional experience, learning about and
understanding their history and developing their nation-state consciousness and cultural identity were
seen as positive experiences.
The transformation of the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical National Park into a sanctuary was completed
after the war when the Gallipoli Campaign took place, and after the five phases developed by
MacCannell (1976) were fulfilled; this is similar to the case of the Waterloo battlefield (Seaton, 1999).
The importance of the Gallipoli Peninsula Historical National Park is different for Turkish compared to
Australian and New Zealander tourists. For Australians and New Zealanders, Gallipoli has a spiritual
meaning and, consequently, cultural and secular pilgrimage characteristics come into greater
prominence. This may be because it represents the beginning of the formation of their respective nation
states and related cultural identity, after the end of the war. In other words, the deaths of Anzac soldiers
have symbolic meaning in terms of social belonging, awareness of being a nation state and the formation
of a cultural identity that includes moral values such as national independence, patriotism and heroism
(Hall, 2002; Hyde and Harman, 2011; Kokkranikal et al., 2015; Ryan, 2007a; Seaton, 2002). In this regard,
visits to the area made by Australian and New Zealander tourists can be thought of as secular or modern
pilgrimages conducted in a historical and cultural context, as discussed in the dark tourism literature
(Collins-Kreiner, 2010a, 2010b; 2016; Stone, 2005), rather than having a religious dimension. This area is
perceived differently by Turkish tourists, whose visits to, and interpretation of, the area includes a
religious aspect and religious rituals. This difference can also be seen by the fact that different
mausoleums and martyrs’ cemeteries have different constructional and architectural forms. Different
22
interpretations and the attribution of different values to the site by tourists depends on the active role
played by cultural identity, developed during the nation-state formation process, alongside the
contributions of archaeological sites, which, over time, have gained a cultural dimension, particularly
in light of the formation of the nation states in question (Palmer, 1999; Young, 1999).
Studies of the motivations of tourists to visit war sites make it clear that tourists are influenced by more
than one motivational factor (Kokkranikal et al., 2015). The travel motivations of both the domestic and
international tourists to the Gallipoli Peninsula who participated in this study illustrate these
differences. The travel motivations of the Australians and New Zealanders who visited the Gallipoli
Peninsula battlefields were mostly participation in a commemoration ceremony (e.g. experiencing a
service at dawn), family bonds and recognition of a different culture, whereas historical
information/awareness, education/learning, family bonds and interest were the travel motivations of
local tourists.
The differences in the experiences gained by the participants can be explained with reference to the
different level of psychological and emotional reflection experienced by the visitors, for various reasons,
during the communication process with the site where the commemoration ceremony was held, as well
as other sites visited (Cohen, 2011). This result supports the view that similar tourism products can
generate different experiences (Prentice et al., 1998).
In this study, it was observed that the experiences expressed under the theme of developing empathy
show that legendary places that bring to mind patriotism and heroism among tourists are perceived
and interpreted differently by members of different societies. The experience approach based on this
phenomenon mostly reflects the iconic experience that is contextualized by tourists' gaze upon the
relevant site, which contributes to the development of the experience, and its content (Hayllar and
Griffin, 2005; Ryan, 2007a; Sternberg, 1999). In other words, it is possible for tourists to obtain these
types of experiences that are socially contextualized by means of the beliefs and opinions that they
already have (Kokkranikal et al., 2015).
Limitations of the Study

The above-mentioned comprehensive study was conducted in order to understand the motivations and
experiences of tourists visiting the Gallipoli Historical National Park. As the research was conducted on
significant dates and in the context of a sample event as part of the research design, the data obtained
are limited in terms of time and place and so generalizations are not possible. In addition, due to time
constraints, focus group interviews with local and foreign tourists could not be conducted.
Some suggestions are presented for researchers and practitioners with regards to the findings of this
study. Studies related to motivation and experience in the context of dark tourism have examined the
phenomenon both from the supply-side and the demand-side. The data obtained from this study show
that there are some cultural differences which constitute a component that affects both motivation and
tourism experiences. Therefore, it would be beneficial for future studies to aim to develop a deeper
understanding of the motivations and experiences of tourists who visit the site, from an anthropological
perspective.
The results and conceptual classifications (typologies) obtained from previous studies on the dark
tourism concept would be valuable in order to present a comparative perspective, rather have more
cultural qualifications and studies of the area in a cultural context. In the context of dark tourism,
studies examining motivation and experience have physiological and socio-cultural dimensions.
23
Therefore, a determination of the dimensions typical to the destinations that affect motivation and
experience, in the context of dark tourism, and their effect on motivation and experience should be
studied by conducting a relational analysis, which may provide important clues for stakeholders in
charge of destination management.
The opinions of tourists visiting the area were evaluated in this study. Future studies may want to focus
on measuring local people’s tourism perceptions and attitudes. A future study may be conducted to
investigate how the attractiveness of destinations can be increased and what steps can be taken to
develop tourism across all seasons of the year by using qualitative research methods with tourism
stakeholders (face-to-face interviews and/or focus group interviews). Studies measuring the levels of
interaction between local people and tourists would be valuable. Studies aiming to understand and/or
measure the degree of reflection of some of the authentic characteristics of the site regarding the
perception of the related place among tourists visiting the area may also contribute positively to the
literature.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the Akdeniz University Scientific Research Coordinator that supported
this project as a PhD Dissertation under Grant No: SDK-2016-1626.
References
Aho, S. K. (2001). Towards a General Theory of Touristic Experiences: Modelling Experience Process in
Tourism. Tourism Review, 56 (3-4), 33-37.
Aliağaoğlu, A. (2008). Savaş Alanları Turizmi İçin Tipik Bir Yer: Gelibolu Yarımadası Tarihi Milli Parkı
[A Typical Place to Battlefield Tourism: Gallipoli Peninsula Historical National Park]. Milli Folklor,
20(78), 88-104.
Amujo, O. C. & Otubanjo O. (2012). Leveraging Rebranding of ‘Unattractive’ Nation Brands to Stimulate
Post-Disaster Tourism. Tourist Studies, 12(1), 87-105.
Auschwitz Report (2014). URL: http://auschwitz.org/en/museum/museum-reports/ (Accessed on
10.11.2015).
Baldwin, F. and Sharpley, R. (2009). Battlefield Tourism: Bringing Organised Violance Back to Life. In
Sharpley, R. and Stone, P. R. (eds.) The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark
Tourism. Bristol: Channel View, 186-206.
Banyai, M. (2010). Dracula's image in tourism: Western bloggers versus tour guides. European Journal
of Tourism Research, 3(1), 5-22.
Basarin, J., Hall, J. and Fewster, K. (2010). Anzac Day at Gallipoli: A Turkish Perspective. In Hede, A.M.
and Rentschler, R. (Eds), Reflections on ANZAC Day: From One Millennium to the Next. Heidelberg
Press: Heidelberg, 65-76.
Bigley, J. D., Lee, C. K., Chon, J. and Yoon, Y. (2010). Motivations for War-Related Tourism: A Case of
DMZ Visitors in Korea. Tourism Geographies, 12(3), 371-394.
Biran, A., Poria Y. and Oren G. (2011). Sought Experiences At (Dark) Heritage Sites. Annals of Tourism
Research, 38(3), 820-841.
Biran, A., Liu, W., Li, G. and Eichhorn, V. (2014). Consuming post-disaster destinations: The case of
Sichuan, China. Annals of Tourism Research, 47, 1-17.
Blom, T. (2000). Morbid Tourism-A Postmodern Market Niche with an Example from Althorp. Norsk
Geografisk Tidsskrift-Norwegian Journal of Geography, 54(1), 29-36.
Boateng, H., Okoe, A. F., and Hinson, R. E. (2018). Dark tourism: Exploring tourist's experience at the
Cape Coast Castle, Ghana. Tourism management perspectives, 27, 104-110.
24
Catalca, H. and Yurtseven, H. R. (2003). Understanding New Anzacs: A Managerial Perspective.

Anatolia, 14(2), 127-141.
Chang, T. Y. (2014). Dark Tourism: The Effects of Motivation and Environmental Attitudes on the
Benefits of Experience. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 72(2), 69-86.
Cheal, F. and Griffin, T. (2013). Pilgrims and Patriots: Australian Tourist Experiences at Gallipoli.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(3), 227-241.
Chen, C. M., and Tsai, T. H. (2019). Tourist motivations in relation to a battlefield: a case study of
Kinmen. Tourism Geographies, 21(1), 78-101.
Clark, L. B. (2010). Always Already Again: Trauma Tourism and the Politics of Memory Culture.
Encounters, 1, 65-79.
Cohen, E. H. (2011). Educational Dark Tourism at an In Populo Site: The Holocaust Museum in
Jerusalem. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 193-209.
Coldwell, W. (2013). Dark Tourism: Why Murder Sites and Disaster Zones Are Proving Popular, The
Guardian, October 31. URL: http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2013/oct/31/dark-tourism-murder-
sites-disaster-zones (Accessed on 06.12.2015).
Collins-Kreiner, N. (2010a). Researching Pilgrimage: Continuity and Transformations. Annals of
Collins-Kreiner, N. (2010b). The Geography of Pilgrimage and Tourism: Transformations and
Implications for Applied Geography. Applied Geography, 30(1), 153-164.
Collins-Kreiner, N. (2016). Dark Tourism as/is pilgrimage. Current Issues in Tourism, 19(12), 1185-1189.
Conway, B. (2010). New Directions in the Sociology of Collective Memory and Commemoration.
Sociology Compass, 4(7) 442-453.
Cooper, M. (2006). The Pacific War Battlefields: Tourist Attractions or War Memorials. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 8, 213-222.
Cooper, M. (2007). Post-Colonial Representations of Japanese Military Heritage: Political and Social
Aspects of Battlefield Tourism in the Pacific and East Asia. In C. Ryan (Ed.), Battlefield Tourism:
History, Place and Interpretation, Oxford, Elsevier, 73-86.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches,
Third Edition. USA: Sage Publications.
Çanakkale İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü [Çanakkale Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism].
URL: http://www.canakkalekulturturizm.gov.tr/ (Accessed on 26.11.2016).
Dark Tourism. (2015). Oxford Dictionary: Language Matters. URL:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/dark-tourism?q=dark+tourism (Accessed
on 11.12.2015).
Donoghue, J. and Tranter, B. (2015). The Anzacs: Military Influences on Australian Identity. Journal of
Sociology, 51(3), 449-463.
Dore, L. (2006). Gallipoli: A Visitor Profile. Historic Environment, 19(2), 46-51.
Dunkley, R., Morgan, N. & Westwood, S. (2011). Visiting the Trenches: Exploring Meanings and
Motivations in Battlefield Tourism. Tourism Management, 32(4), 860-868.
Farmaki, A. (2013). Dark Tourism Revisited: A Supply/Demand Conceptualisation. International Journal
of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(3), 281-292.
Foley, M. and Lennon, J. (1996a). Editorial: Heart of Darkness. International Journal of Heritage Studies,
2(4), 195-197.
Foley, M. and Lennon, J. (1996b). JFK and Dark Tourism: A Fascination with Assassination. International
Journal of Heritage Studies, 2(4), 198-211.
Gatewood, J. B. and Cameron, C. M. (2004). Battlefield Pilgrims at Gettysburg National Military Park.
Ethnology, 43(3), 193-216.
Goatcher, J. and Brunsden, V. (2011). Chernobyl and the Sublime Tourist. Tourist Studies, 11(2), 115-137.
25
Gordon, B. M. (1998). Warfare and Tourism: Paris in World War II. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(3),
616-638.
Graham, J. (2008). Young New Zealanders and the Great War: Exploring the Impact and Legacy of the
First World War, 1914-2014. Paedagogica Historica, 44(4), 429-444.
Hall, C. M. (2002). ANZAC Day and Secular Pilgrimage. Tourism Recreation Research, 27(2), 83-87.
Hall, J. and Basarin, J. (2009). Anzac Day Commemorations at Gallipoli and the Economic Effects of
Attendance. CAUTHE 2009: See Change: Tourism & Hospitality is a Dynamic World [online].
Carlsen, J., Hughes, M., Holmes, K., Jones, R. (eds.). 1871-1885. URL:
https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=171983306327206;res=IELBUS (Accessed on
19.12.2016).
Hall, J., Basarin V. J. and Binney, L. L. (2010). An Empirical Analysis of Attendance at a Commemorative
Event: Anzac Day at Gallipoli. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(2), 245-253.
Hartmann, R. (2014). Dark Tourism, Thanatourism, and Dissonance in Heritage Tourism Management:
New Directions in Contemporary Tourism Research. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 9(2), 166-182.
Hayllar, B. and Griffin, T. (2005). The Precinct Experience: A Phenomenological Approach. Tourism
Management, 26(4), 517-528.
Hede, A. M. and Hall J. (2006). Evoked Emotions: A Textual Analysis Within the Context of Pilgrimage
Tourism to Gallipoli. In Lees, M. C., Davis, T. and Gregory, G. (eds.), Asia-Pacific Advances in
Consumer Research Volume 7. Sydney, Australia: Association for Consumer Research, 419-425.
Henderson, J. C. (2000). War as a Tourist Attraction: The Case of Vietnam. International Journal of
Hennink, M., Hutter, I. and Bailey, A. (2011). Qualitative Research Methods, Sage: Great Britain.
Hurt, D. A. (2010). Reinterpreting the Washita Battlefield National Historic Site. The Geographical
Review, 100(3), 375-393.
Hyde, K. F. and Harman S. (2011). Motives for a Secular Pilgrimage to the Gallipoli Battlefields. Tourism
Management, 32(6), 1343-1351.
Isaac, R. K., Nawijn, J., van Liempt, A., and Gridnevskiy, K. (2019). Understanding Dutch visitors’
motivations to concentration camp memorials. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(7), 747-762.
Iles, J. (2008). Encounters in the Fields: Tourism to the Battlefields of the Western Front. Journal of
Tourism and Cultural Change, 6(2), 138-154.
Irimiás, A. (2014). The Great War Heritage Site Management in Trentino, Northern Italy. Journal of
Heritage Tourism, 9(4), 317-331.
Isaac, R. K. and Çakmak, E. (2013). Understanding Visitor’s Motivation at Sites of Death and Disaster:
The Case of former Transit Camp Westerbrook, the Netherlands. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(2),
164-179.
Ivanova, P., and Light, D. (2018). ‘It’s not that we like death or anything’: exploring the motivations and
experiences of visitors to a lighter dark tourism attraction. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 13(4), 356-
369.
Johnston, T. (2011). Thanatourism and the Commodification of Space in Post-War Croatia and Bosnia.
In Shapley, R. and Stone, P. R. (eds.) Tourist Experience: Contemporary Perspectives. UK: Routledge,
43-55.
Kang, E. J., Scott N., Lee T. J. and Ballantyne R. (2012). Benefits of Visiting a ‘dark tourism’ Site: The Case
of the Jeju April 3rd Peace Park Korea. Tourism Management, 33(2), 257-265.
Kang, E. J., Lee, T. J., and Han, J. S. (2018). The influence of enduring involvement on tragedy-related
tourism experiences. Journal of Travel Research, 57(5), 658-670.
Kaya, O. (2006). Ölüm Turizmi: Gelibolu Yarımadası Tarihi Milli Parkı’nı Ziyaret Eden Turistlerin
Ziyaret Motivasyonlarını Anlamaya Yönelik Bir Araştırma ve Sonuçları [Death Tourism: An
Investigation and Results for Getting Insight towards the Visitor Motivations of the Travellers
26
Visiting Gallipoli Historical National Park]. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi [Unpublished
Master Thesis]. Çanakkale On Sekiz Mart Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Turizm İşletmeciliği
Ana Bilim Dalı, Çanakkale.
Kidron, C. A. (2013). Being There Together: Dark Family Tourism and The Emotive Experience of Co-
Presence in The Holocaust Past. Annals of Tourism Research, 41, 175-194.
Knox, D. (2006). The Sacralised Landscapes of Glencoe: From Massacre to Mass Tourism, and Back
Again. International Journal of Tourism Research, 8(3), 185-197.
Kokkranikal, J., Yang, Y. S., Powell, R. and Booth, E. (2015). Motivations in Battlefield Tourism: The Case
of ‘1916 Easter Rising Rebellion’, Dublin. In Katsoni, V., Stratigea A. (eds.) Tourism and Culture in the
Age of Innovation, Second International Conference, IACuDiT, Athens 2015, 321-330.
Korstanje, M. E. (2011). Detaching the Elemantary Forms of Dark-Tourism. Anatolia, 22(3), 424-427.
Kozak, M. A. and Bahçe S. (2012). Özel İlgi Turizmi [Special Interest Tourism]. İkinci Baskı Ankara:
Detay Yayıncılık.
Kurnaz, H. A., Çeken H. and Kılıç B. (2013). Hüzün Turizmi Katılımcılarının Seyahat Motivasyonlarının
Belirlenmesi [Determination of Dark Tourism Participants’ Motivations]. İşletme Araştırmaları
Dergisi, 5(2), 57-73.
Lagos, E., Harris A. and Sigala, M. (2015). Emotional Language For Image Formation and Market
Segmentation in Dark Tourism Destinations: Findings From Tour Operators’ Websites Promoting
Gallipoli. TOURISMOS: An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 10(2), 153-170.
Lennon, J. J. and Foley, M. (1999). Interpretation of the Unimaginable: The US Holocaust Memorial
Museum, Washington, DC, and ‘Dark Tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 38(1), 46-50.
Lennon, J. (2005). Journeys into Understanding: What is Dark Tourism? The Guardian, October 23.
URL: http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2005/oct/23/darktourism.observerescapesection
(Accessed on 24.11.2015).
Leopold, T. (2007). A Proposed Code of Conduct for War Heritage Sites. In Ryan, C. (ed.). Battlefield
Tourism: History, Place and Interpretation, Oxford, Elsevier, 49-58.
Light, D. (2007). Dracula tourism in Romania cultural identity and the state. Annals of tourism
research, 34(3), 746-765.
Light, D. (2017). Progress in dark tourism and then a tourism research: An uneasy relationship with
heritage tourism. Tourism Management, 61, 275-301.
Lin, Y., Kelemen, M., and Tresidder, R. (2018). Post-disaster tourism: building resilience through
community-led approaches in the aftermath of the 2011 disasters in Japan. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 26(10), 1766-1783.
Lippard, L. R. (1999). On the Beaten Track: Tourism, Art and Place. New York: The New Press.
Liyanage, S., Stefaniak, J. A. C. and Powell, R. (2015). Dark Destinations: Visitor Reflections from a
Holocaust Memorial Site. International Journal of Tourism Cities, 1(4), 282-298.
MacCannell, D. (1976). The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. London: University of California
Press.
McKenna, M. and Ward S. (2007). It was really moving, mate’: The Gallipoli Pilgrimage and Sentimental
Nationalism in Australia, Australian Historical Studies, 38(129), 141-151.
McKercher, B. (2002). Towards a Classification of Cultural Tourists. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 4(1), 29-38.
Miles, W. (2002). Auschwitz: Museum Interpretation and Darker Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,
29(4), 1175-1178.
Miles, S. (2014). Battlefield Sites as Dark Tourism Attractions: An Analysis of Experience. Journal of
Heritage Tourism, 9(2), 134-147.
27
Miller, D. S. and Gonzalez, C. (2013). When Death is the Destination: The Business of Death Tourism-
Despite Legal and Social Implications. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 7(3), 293-306.
Misztal, B. A. (2003). Theories of Social Remembering, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Muzaini, H., Teo P. and Yeoh B. S. A. (2007). Intimations of Postmodernity in Dark Tourism: The Fate
of History at Fort Siloso, Singapore. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 5(1), 28-45.
Nawijn, J., & Fricke, M. C. (2015). Visitor emotions and behavioral intentions: The case of concentration
camp memorial Neuengamme. International Journal of Tourism Research, 17(3), 221-228.
Ozer, S. U., Ersoy, G. K. and Tuzunkan, D. (2012). Dark Tourism in Gallipoli: Forecast Analysis to
Determine Potential of Australian Visitors. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 41, 386-393.
Pearce, P. L. and Caltabiano, M. L. (1983). Inferring Travel Motivation from Travelers’ Experiences.
Journal of Travel Research, 22(2), 16-20.
Pennell, C. (2018). Taught to remember? British youth and First World War centenary battlefield
tours. Cultural Trends, 27(2), 83-98.
Pieris, A. (2014). Southern Invasions: Post-War Tourism in Sri-Lanka. Postcolonial Studies, 17(3), 266-
285.
Piersig, C. B. (1994). Gallipoli Revisited: An Operational Assessment of the 1915 Dardanelles Campaign,
Operations Research Paper, Naval War College, Newport: Rhode Island.
Podoshen, J. S. and Hunt, J. M. (2011). Equity Restoration, the Holocaust and Tourism of Sacred Sites.
Podoshen, J. S. (2017). Trajectories in Holocaust tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 12(4), 347-364.
Preece, T and Price, G. G. (2005). Motivations of Participants in Dark Tourism: A Case Study of Port
Arthur, Tasmania, Australia. In Aicken, M., Page, S. J. and Ryan, C. (eds.) Taking Tourism to the
Limits: Issues, Concepts and Managerial Perspectives (Advances in Tourism Research). Routledge:
UK, 191-198.
Prentice, R. C., Witt, S. F. and Hamer, C. (1998). Tourism as Experience: The Case of Heritage Parks.
Prideaux, B. (2007). Echoes of War: Battlefield Tourism. In Ryan, C. (Ed.), Battlefield Tourism: History,
Place and Interpretation. Oxford: Elsevier, 17-28.
Powell, R. and Iankova, K. (2016). Dark London: Dimensions and Characteristics of Dark Tourism
Supply in the UK Capital. Anatolia, 27(3), 339-351.
Powell, R. and Kennell, J. (2016). Dark Cities? Developing a Methodology for Researching Dark Tourism
in European Cities. In V. Katsoni, & A. Stratigea (Eds.), Tourism and culture in the age of innovation
(pp. 303-319). Heidelburg: Springer.
Raine, R. (2013). A Dark Tourism Spectrum. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 7(3), 242-256.
Rojek, C. (1993). Ways of Escape: Modern Transformations of Leisure and Travel. London: Macmillan.
Ryan, C. (2007a). Introduction. In Ryan, C. (Ed.), Battlefield Tourism: History, Place and Interpretation,
Oxford, Elsevier, 1-10.
Ryan, C. (2007b). Battlefield Tourism: History, Place and Interpretation, Oxford, Elsevier, 249-254.
Ryan, C. and Cave, J. (2007). Cambridge Armistice Day Celebrations: Making a Carnival of War and the
Reality of Play. In C. Ryan (Ed.), Battlefield Tourism: History, Place and Interpretation, Oxford,
Elsevier: 177-186.
Sackett, L. (1985). Marching into the Past: Anzac Day Celebrations in Adelaide. Journal of Australian
Studies, 9(17): 18-30.
Scates, B. (2002). In Gallipoli’s Shadow: Pilgrimage, Memory, Mourning and The Great War. Australian
Historical Studies, 33(119), 1-21.
28
Scates, B. (2006). Return to Gallipoli: Walking the Battlefields of the Great War, Cambridge University
Press: Australia.
Seaton, A. V. (1996). Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to Thanatourism. International Journal of
Heritage Studies, 2(4), 234-244.
Seaton, A. V. (1999). War and Thanatourism: Waterloo 1815-1914. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(1), 130-
158.
Seaton, A. V. (2002). Thanatourism’s Final Frontiers? Visits to Cemeteries, Churchyards and Funerary
Sites as Sacred and Secular Pilgrimage. Tourism Recreation Research, 27(2), 73-82.
Sion, B. (2014). Conflicting Sites of Memory in Post-Genocide Cambodia. In Sion, B (Ed.), Disaster Sites
as Recreational Landscape, Seagull, India, 97-120.
Sharpley, R. (2005). Travels to the Edge of Darkness: Towards a Typology of “Dark Tourism”. In Aicken,
M., Page, S. J. and Ryan, C. (eds.) Taking Tourism to the Limits: Issues, Concepts and Managerial
Perspectives (Advances in Tourism Research). Routledge: UK, 215-226.
Sharpley, R. (2009). Shedding Light on Dark Tourism: An Introduction. In Sharpley, R. and Stone, P.
(eds.) The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism. UK: Channel View
Publications, 3-22.
Sharpley, R. and Stone, P. R. (2009). (Re)presenting the Macabre: Interpretation, Kitschification and
Authenticity. In Sharpley, R. and Stone, P. R. (eds.) The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice
of Dark Tourism. UK: Channel View Publications, 109-128.
Slade, P. (2003). Gallipoli Thanatourism: The Meaning of ANZAC. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(4),
779-794.
Smith, V. L. (1998). War and Tourism: An American Ethnography. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(1),
202-227.
Smith, N. and Croy, W. G. (2005). Presentation of Dark Tourism: Te Wairoa: The Buried Village. In
Aicken, M., Page, S. J. and Ryan, C. (eds.) Taking Tourism to the Limits: Issues, Concepts and
Managerial Perspectives (Advances in Tourism Research). UK: Routledge, 199-213.
Smith, H. (2007). Seventy Years of Waiting: A Turning Point of Interpreting the Spanish Civil War? In
Ryan, C. (ed.) Battlefield Tourism: History, Place and Interpretation. Oxford: Elsevier, 99-110.
Somme and Ypres Battlefields of the Great War. (2015). 1914-1918. URL: http://www.battlefield-
tours.com/ (Accessed on 28.12.2015).
Stephens, J. R. (2014). Sacred Landscapes: Albany and Anzac Pilgrimage. Landscape Research, 39(1), 21-
39.
Sternberg, E. (1999). The Economy of Icons. Westport, USA: Praeger.
Stone, P. R. (2005). Dark Tourism Consumption: A Call for Research. E-Review of Tourism Research
(eRTR), 3(5), 109-117.
Stone, P. R. (2006). A Dark Tourism Spectrum: Towards a Typology of Death and Macabre Related
Tourist Sites, Attractions and Exhibitions. Tourism: An Interdisciplinary International Journal, 54(2),
145-160.
Stone, P. R. (2009). It is a Bloody Guide: Fun, Fear and Lighter Side of Dark Tourism at the Dungeon
Visitor Attractions, UK. In Sharpley, R. and Stone, P. R. (eds.) The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory
and Practice of Dark Tourism. UK: Channel View Publications, 167-185.
Stone, P. R. (2013a). Dark Tourism, Heterotopias and Post-Apocalyptic Places: The Case of Chernobyl.
In L. White and E. Frew. (eds.) Dark Tourism and Place Identity. Melbourne: Routledge, 1-19.
Strange, C. and Kempa M. (2003). Shades of Dark Tourism: Alcatraz and Robben Island. Annals of
Stone, P., and Sharpley, R. (2008). Consuming dark tourism: A thanatological perspective. Annals of
tourism Research, 35(2), 574-595.
29
Vázquez, D. G. (2018). Dark tourism and memorial tourism: Nexus and divergences between theoretical
models. European Journal of Tourism Research, 20, 46-58.
Virgili, S., Delacour, H., Bornarel, F., and Liarte, S. (2018). ‘From the Flames to the Light’: 100 years of
the commodification of the dark tourist site around the Verdun battlefield. Annals of Tourism
Research, 68, 61-72.
West, B. (2008). Enchanting Pasts: The Role of International Civil Religious Pilgrimage in Reimagining
National Collective Memory. Sociological Theory, 26(3), 258-270.
Willis, E. (2014). Theatricality, Dark Tourism and Ethical Spectatorship: Absent Others. Palgrave
Macmillan.
Wilson, J. Z., Hodgkinson, S., Piché, J., and Walby, K. (eds.). (2017). The Palgrave Handbook of Prison
Tourism. UK: Springer.
Winter, J. (2008). Sites of Memory and the Shadow of War. In Erll, A. and Nünning, A. (eds.) Media and
Cultural Memory. Germany: Walter De Gruyter, 61-74.
Winter, C. (2009). Tourism, Social Memory and the Great War. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(4), 607-
626.
Winter, C. (2011a). First World War Cemeteries: Insights from Visitor Books. Tourism Geographies, 13(3),
462-479.
Winter, C. (2011b). Battlefield Visitor Motivations: Explorations in the Great War Town of Ieper,
Belgium. International Journal of Tourism Research, 13(2), 164-176.
Wheatley, R. and James L. (2014). ‘Such a Great Space of Water between Us’: Anzac Day in Britain, 1916-
39. Australian Historical Studies, 45(2), 220-241.
Wright, D., and Sharpley, R. (2018). Local community perceptions of disaster tourism: the case of
L'Aquila, Italy. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(14), 1569-1585.
Yankovska, G. and Hannam, K. (2014). Dark and Toxic Tourism in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.
Current Issues in Tourism, 17(10), 929-939.
Yeneroğlu-Kutbay, E. and Aykac, A. (2016). Battlefield Tourism at Gallipoli: The Revival of Collective
Memory, the Construction of National Identity and the Making of a Long-distance Tourism
Network. Alma Tourism Special Issue, 7(5), 61-83.
Young, M. (1999). The Relationship between Tourist Motivations and the Interpretation of Place
Meanings. Tourism Geographies, 1(4), 387-405.
Yuill, S. M. (2003). Dark Tourism: Understanding Visitor Motivation at Sites of Death and Disaster, MSc.
Thesis, Texas A&M University.
Zheng, C., Zhang, J., Qian, L., Jurowski, C., Zhang, H., and Yan, B. (2018). The inner struggle of visiting
‘dark tourism’sites: examining the relationship between perceived constraints and
motivations. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(15), 1710-1727.
30
Tourism competitiveness and the well-being of residents: a debate
on registered and non-registered accommodation establishments
José Francisco Perles-Ribes 1*, Ana Belén Ramón-Rodríguez 2,

Luis Moreno-Izquierdo 3 and María Jesús Such-Devesa 4
1
Department of Applied Economic Analysis, Faculty of Economics and Business Sciences, University of Alicante,
Campus San Vicente del Raspeig, 03080 Alicante, Spain, Tel: +34 96 590 36 09. E-mail: jose.perles@ua.es
2 Department of Applied Economic Analysis, Faculty of Economics and Business Sciences, University of Alicante.
E-mail: anar@ua.es
3 Department of Applied Economic Analysis, Faculty of Economics and Business Sciences, University of Alicante.
E-mail: luis.moreno@ua.es
4 Department of Economics, Faculty of economics, business and tourism, University of Alcalá. E-mail:
mjesus.such@uah.es
Abstract
The literature on the competitiveness of tourist destinations establishes as its ultimate objective the well-being of
the resident population. In Spain, the principal tourism product (sun and beach) has given rise to two basic types
of destinations - those where there is a clear predominance of registered accommodation (mainly hotels) and those
that are characterised by a supply largely made up of rental apartments and housing (non-registered, or sometimes
known as the residential or second home model). The debate on the issue has been focusing on the different
economic, social, cultural or environmental impacts that the two tourism models have on the territory. This article
explores the economic aspect of the debate, comparing the differences existing in terms of income and employment
in a pool of coastal destinations in the Region of Valencia, one of the leading tourism regions of the sun and beach
tourism product in Spain and Europe. This comparison is done by way of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing and
regression analysis. The results obtained indicate the neutrality of the composition of the accommodation supply
on income and employment of destinations.
Keywords: competitiveness, well-being, accommodation supply, economic impact, Spain
Citation: Perles-Ribes, J. F., Ramón-Rodríguez, A.B., Moreno-Izquierdo, L and Such-Devesa, M. J. (2020). Tourism
competitiveness and the well-being of residents: a debate on registered and non-registered accommodation
establishments. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2406.

RESEARCH PAPER 1
Tourism competitiveness and the well-being of residents: a debate on registered and non-registered accommodation establishments
Introduction
The most common theories of tourism competitiveness, those of Dwyer & Kim (2003) and of Ritchie &
Crouch (2003), establish the well-being of the resident population as a basic premise of the success of
the destinations, which should theoretically adapt their policies to maximise their comparative
advantages but without going beyond a limit which would clearly detriment the quality of life (QOL)
of the inhabitants.
In Spain, and specifically in one of its leading tourism products (sun and beach), there are two basic
types of destination: those in which there is a clear predominance of registered accommodation - mainly
hotels - and those characterised by a supply largely made up of apartments and second homes for
potential tourist use, many of which are not registered. These two tourism models have given rise to a
debate about the different economic, social, cultural or environmental impacts that they generate.
This matter is addressed in this article, which analyses the differences in terms of income and
employment in a pool of coastal destinations in the Region of Valencia. Specifically, this article seeks to
test, for a group of coastal destinations, the differences in terms of the economic impact on the residents
according to the type of tourist accommodation supply. Therefore, it seeks to confirm or refute the
recommendation of one type of supply or another based on the well-being of the inhabitants.
If the evidence points to better economic results of hotel destinations, it will be proved that this option
is the best in terms of satisfying the well-being of the citizens as these types of destination are also better
than residential destinations in terms of sustainability issues. However, if the residential destinations
have a greater economic impact, there may be doubts as to whether this difference in well-being criteria
is sufficient to compensate the wear suffered in terms of sustainability. Therefore, it is the subject of a
continuous debate on the different economic, social, cultural or environmental impacts that they
generate, not only within the academic field.
The research topic is timely and relevant and this article complements a dynamic line of research in
which residents are understood as being an active part of the tourist community; fundamental actors
who facilitate and suffer its development, particularly with the new collaborative supply models and the
problem of over-tourism (Cardoso & Silva, 2018; Postma & Schmuecker, 2017; Brida, Riaño, Such-Devesa
& Zapata-Aguirre, 2012). While previous articles, such as García & Servera (2003) or Obrador (2017)
study the exploitation of water resources and the sustainability of Mediterranean destinations to
address the impact of tourism development on residents and their acceptance of it, this article directly
addresses the issue examining the economic factors and, more specifically the levels of income and
employment existing in the destinations generated by the different types of tourism development.
The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 reviews the previous literature and explains the basic facts
of the residential and holiday tourism in Spain. Section 3 explains the data, and the methodology.
Section 3 performs the exploratory data analysis and basic statistical inference and the econometric
analysis using Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression. Finally, section 4 and 5 discuss the main findings
and the limitations of the study.
Literature review
Competitiveness and well-being in tourism destinations: a literature review
Although the relationship between the competitiveness of the destinations and the quality of life of
their residents is fairly obvious, the scientific literature on the two topics has, until very recently, taken
parallel and independent paths. With respect to the quality of life of the residents of tourism
2
Perles-Ribes et al. (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2406
destinations and its determinants in different parts of the world, the literature reveals that while there
are numerous and disparate interpretations of the terms QOL or well-being (WB) (Filep and Deery,
2010), there is a general consensus on its causes. In this way, authors such as Sirakaya, Teye & Sönmez
(2002), Aref (2011), Nawijn and Mitas (2012), Almeida-García, Peláez-Fernández, Balbuena-Vazquez, and
Cortes-Macias (2016) or Liang and Hui (2016) among others, from an applied perspective, have shown
that the improvements in economic factors (increased employment, higher incomes, improved
infrastructures) are associated with higher levels of quality of life or well-being while problems in
economic, social and environmental aspects related to a lack of sustainability, the loss of identity and
an excess of tourists is associated to lower levels of satisfaction among the residents of the tourist
destinations.
In light of this evidence, an explanatory synthetic model of the quality of life or well-being of the
residents of tourist destinations is determined as a function of the direct or indirect economic benefits
obtained by the residents, and the perception of the socio-cultural impact and that of sustainability of
the destination overall. In this model, while elements such as employment or wealth would help to
improve the well-being of the residents, other elements related to climate change or the rental of tourist
apartments would be detrimental to it if they were not adequately compensated.
Focusing on competitiveness and its determinants, the literature reveals that these economic, social
and environmental aspects that affect the quality of life of the residents are, in turn, related to the
competitiveness of the destinations and their sustainability (Modica & Uysal, 2016). Not only is the
quality of life of the residents the ultimate objective of competitiveness, as already mentioned, but these
economic, social and environmental aspects also shape the multidimensionality of the concept of
tourism competitiveness (Spence & Hazard, 1988).
For this reason, the tourism strategies aimed at promoting the competitiveness of destinations imply
optimising economic performance but in a way that is compatible with the lowest possible social and
environmental impact, which essentially is the same as increasing the well-being of the residents of the
tourist destinations.
Typology of accommodation, tourism competitiveness and residents’ well-being: towards a conceptual

framework.
Viewed through this theoretical lens, this study addresses the relationship between the competitiveness
of the destinations and the quality of life of their residents, using a comprehensive approach. Figure 1
schematically describes the conceptual framework of reference.
Typology of
accommodation Competitiveness Residents’
(registered vs. Not of destinations quality of life
registered)
Figure 1. Proposed conceptual framework
3
Within this framework, the precursor of the relationship between competitiveness and the quality of
life is the type of tourism development prevailing in each destination. It is understood that the
predominant type of accommodation supply in a destination (registered or non-registered) conditions
its competitiveness, which, in turn, affects the quality of life of its residents.
The data existing for the Spanish case seem to corroborate the plausibility of the proposed framework.
Table 1 shows the relationship between the composition of the accommodation supply (second column
of the table), the indicators of tourism competitiveness of the regions (first column), the income per
capita of the regions (third column) and two synthetic indicators of the quality of life (fourth and fifth
columns) generated by different institutions in 15 of the 17 Spanish regions.
The calculation of the Pearson correlation coefficient shows the existence of positive linear associations
between a higher presence of regulated supply and the levels of competitiveness of the destinations
(0.51). The relationship between the level of competitiveness and income per capita of the region (0.33)
also shows a positive association, although to a lesser degree than in the previous case, which is
explained by the existence of additional determinants – unrelated to the tourism competitiveness of the
region under study – that potentially influence the income levels of its residents.
Finally, and in relation to the debate on the appropriateness of income per capita as a possible indicator
of the well-being or quality of life of the inhabitants of a territory, the correlation analysis reveals a
positive association between income per capita of the region and the levels of well-being noted by its
residents, although the degree varies depending on the choice of specific synthetic index used to reflect
the quality of life (0.42 in relation to the index calculated by the INE and 0.81 in relation the index
calculated by Herrero, Villar & Soler, 2018).
Spanish hotel-based and residential destinations: an ongoing debate on the effects of each type of
accommodation
Turning away from the conceptual map and focusing on the practical aspects, due to the lack of specific
data for all of the variables included in the model presented in Figure 1 on a municipal level (level of
analysis of this study) the article adopts a simplified version of it to test whether the type of
configuration of the accommodation supply (registered or non-registered) of destinations has a real
impact on the well-being of the residents, measured through their income per capita.
As explained in the introduction section, to do this, the analysis is based on the two basic types of
destination in the sun and sand product: those in which there is a clear predominance of registered
accommodation establishments (also called hotel destinations as the predominant accommodation
supply in the destinations is hotels) and those characterised by a supply largely made up of apartments
and second homes for potential tourist use (also called residential destinations), many of which are not
legally registered (Perles-Ribes, Ramón-Rodríguez, Sevilla-Jiménez & Moreno-Izquierdo, 2018, among
others). Thanks to different tour operators, word of mouth and, more recently, platforms such as
Airbnb, the supply that is not legally registered has a very high level of activity in Spanish destinations
and cannot be considered as being marginal in any way.
In general terms, academics have shown a preference for the registered typology, with a greater presence
of hotels in the destinations, due to the higher economic profits and lower environmental impacts
(Gartner, 1987; Hall, 2015; Mazón, 2006; Vera & Ivars, 2003). On an environmental level the empirical
evidence seems to generate more or less conclusive results (Morote, Saurí, & Hernández, 2016; Perles-
4
Ribes, Ramón-Rodríguez, Ivars-Baidal & Such-Devesa, 2018). On an economic level the results are more
controversial.
Table 1. Relationship between tourist accommodation, competitiveness and well-being in Spanish regions
accommodation Satisfaction Satisfacción
supply ratio (well- (weññ-
Exceltur (registered/ being) being)
competitiveness non-registered) GDP per index INE BBVA-IVIE
Region index 2018 index capita 2018 2013 2018
País Vasco 112.60 74.79 131.80 102.90 136.64
Canarias 111.20 455.22 81.30 100.00 54.02
C.Madrid 109.90 82.59 135.10 101.45 130.28
C.Valenciana 108.60 63.37 87.60 102.90 85.79
Cataluña 108.30 94.89 119.00 102.90 104.86
Andalucía 107.20 76.39 74.00 97.10 54.02
Baleares 106.30 450.50 103.50 105.80 101.68
Castilla & León 97.00 27.30 94.40 94.20 114.39
Galicia 95.90 33.65 90.10 88.41 98.50
Navarra 95.20 68.43 123.00 104.35 133.46
Asturias 95.00 53.39 89.30 101.45 104.86
Murcia 94.90 29.70 81.70 100.00 69.91
Castilla La Mancha 93.60 23.93 79.90 101.45 76.26
Cantabria 92.80 51.07 92.10 98.55 117.57
La Rioja 91.40 33.19 103.80 101.45 136.64
Extremadura 91.20 26.65 70.30 98.55 76.26
Aragón 91.10 54.96 110.80 101.45 104.86
Index numbers Spain = 100. Source: Exceltur (2018b); INE (2018a, b); Herrero, Villar & Soler, (2018)
Going beyond the academic field and in the case of Spain, Exceltur, an organisation formed by the
country’s most important tourism companies, also clearly advocates the advantage of the registered
accommodation typology based on issues relating to the economic impact on the destinations. These
conclusions are draw from the pioneer study on the differences in economic terms between the different
types of accommodation supply (registered and non-registered), based on official sources referring to
demand (surveys and records of tourist flows, duration of stay and tourist spending by each type of
tourist) and some estimates on tourism supply (Exceltur, 2005).
Specifically, in terms of income (the gross value added generated directly and indirectly in the
destinations), the study finds a difference of 11 to 1 in the year 2003 (€13,634 for each registered place as
opposed to €1,287 for each place in tourist rental accommodation) (Exceltur, 2005:41). With respect to
employment, a difference of 9.5 to 1 was found: which increased to 11 to 1 when the indirect and induced
effects on other sectors were taken into account (Exceltur, 2005:43).
According to their reports, these differences persist over time. A new study on the topic in the wake of
the debate caused by the strong growth experienced by P2P property marketing platforms in Spain in
recent years places the current difference at a ratio of 5 to 1 in favour of registered places. In other words,
5
the economic activity generated from each registered place represents €24,155 as opposed to the €4,932
generated by each tourist rental accommodation place offered (Exceltur, 2015:46). And in terms of
employment, it is currently estimated that for every 100 rented property places 8.9 job positions are
generated per year, while the same number of places for registered supply translates into 53.3 job
positions (Exceltur, 2015:49).
Apart from the studies carried out by Exceltur, a recent study by Perles-Ribes, Ramón-Rodríguez,
Sevilla-Jiménez & Moreno-Izquierdo (2016) confirms the hypothesis of the better economic
performance of destinations where there is a predominance of registered accommodation, comparing
the behaviour in terms of employment performance of a series of destinations on the Spanish
Mediterranean coast, the Balearic Islands and the Canary Islands during the latest economic crisis. In
this study, the authors find that during the crisis, residential destinations displayed worse behaviour in
terms of job destruction than hotel destinations, with a clearly negative impact on the well-being of the
resident population of the destinations. However, another article by Perles-Ribes, Ramón-Rodríguez,
Sevilla-Jiménez & Moreno-Izquierdo (2018) analyses the different economic performance of the same
destinations using the existing retail supply in the destinations as a proxy. In this case and contrary to
the previous exercise, the findings do not reveal any significant difference between the two types of
destination. Therefore, we cannot draw relevant conclusions about the impact on the well-being of the
residents. In this sense, the research field is not closed and this disparity in the results justifies studies
that address issues such as this one.
Unlike the afore-mentioned studies that analyse the whole of the Spanish Mediterranean area, this
study seeks to shed light on the subject by focusing on a specific region of this area (the Region of
Valencia), which enables us to isolate the potential effects that the presence of different regions with
their own institutions responsible for tourism and different economic social and demographic
structures and specialisations can have on the phenomenon.
In the same way and in order to obtain greater precision in the effect under study, this article
contemplates a higher number of control variables than the pre-existing studies on the subject. Both
aspects, namely a greater territorial precision and a higher number of variables, are the principle
novelties of the article.
Methodology and data

According to the Exceltur position, it would be expected that residents of the predominantly hotel
destinations perceive higher levels of income than those in destinations where the predominant
accommodation supply is rental properties. This matter is addressed in this article, which analyses the
differences in terms of income and employment in a pool of coastal destinations in the Region of
Valencia.
With 7.8 million international tourists in 2016 (10.36% of the Spanish total) and 17.1 million Spanish
visitors (9.44% of all domestic tourism) it constitutes one of Spain’s principal tourist regions (INE, 2017a,
b). Tourism is the region's principal source of wealth and employment. According to Exceltur (2018a),
the tourism activity represents 14.6% of regional GDP and 15.1% of employment, being one of the highest
in the whole of Spain, only behind the Balearic Islands (44,8% of regional GDP) and the Canary Islands
(35.2% of regional GDP). Within the region itself, the weight of tourism in the coastal destinations
included in the sample under study is much higher as a very high percentage of the total tourism supply
of the region is concentrated in these destinations.
6
Previous studies, such as Ivars-Baidal, Rodríguez-Sánchez & Vera-Rebollo (2013), Vera-Rebollo & Ivars-
Baidal (2003) or Moreno-Izquierdo Ramón-Rodríguez, Such-Devesa, & Perles-Ribes (2019) have
analysed the heterogeneity of the types of tourism in the Region of Valencia, where there are highly
specialised destinations in terms of both registered and non-registered accommodation supply which
generate substantial differences in employment, urban planning or the presence of Airbnb, among other
issues.
The analysis has been carried out on a sample of 58 sun and sand destinations in the Region of Valencia.
For the final analysis, four towns were eliminated from the sample (the provincial capitals of Valencia,
Alicante and Castellón, and the town of Elche), as the weight of tourism in their economies is lower
than the rest of tourist destinations due to a greater development of urban and industrial activities
which could distort the analysis. This sample of destinations belonging to the Region of Valencia seeks
to be representative of the coastal destinations in the Mediterranean Area.
In order to identify the type of supply in the destinations, the total beds in hotels and registered
apartments in each of the destinations and the percentage of the number of second residences with
respect to the total have been taken. These variables form part of the set of variables used in Perles,
Ramón & Sevilla (2011) to identify the type of sun and beach tourist destination in accordance with their
supply. Table 2 explains the variables used in the analysis and their source.
Specifically, of the explanatory variables considered in Table 2, the variable of interest is the ratio
variable (RATIO), which reflects the accommodation supply composition of each destination. In order
to determine more precisely the scope of the effects that a different accommodation composition
generates on the income and employment of the destinations, and as found by Perles, Ivars, Ramón &
Vera (2019), the study has been completed with the incorporation of other variables related to the
economic and demographic structure of the relevant destinations in this context and the variables that
reflect other structural aspects of the tourism tradition and policy in each province.
The demographic and socio-economic variables included are the size of the destination (POPU), the
percentage of European Union foreigners (PIMRES) living in the destinations as a reflection of the
degree of residentiality (supply largely made up of apartments and second homes for potential tourist
use) of destinations, and the economic conjuncture of each destination (UNEM).
The variables that seek to control the territorial effects derived from the existence of tourism brands or
other structural elements of the tourism tradition and policy in each province are included in a
categorical variable PROVINCE. These reflect other structural features of the territorial subdivision of
the Region of Valencia and the promotional efforts of each international tourism board/trademark
(Costa Blanca in Alicante, Costa de Azahar in Castellón and Costa de Valencia in Valencia) in the region.
The study methodology comprises two phases. As an exploratory exercise on this dataset, a means
comparison of the income and employment variables between the two kinds of destination (registered
vs. non-registered) by way of a Null Hypothesis Significance Test using an independent samples t-test
has been performed. The assumptions and conditions for the use of this technique were previously
checked and confirmed. To this end, the RATIO variable constructed as the division between the total
number of registered places in the destinations and the estimated places in properties potentially used
for tourism, and dichotomised into two groups (registered vs. non-registered) using the percentile 0.5
as the cut-off point of the distribution of this variable, seeks to estimate the different composition of
accommodation supply in each destination.
7
Table 2. Variables used for the analysis

Element Variable Definition Year of Source
reference
Dependent variables
Income INCOME Average disposable income 2015 Spanish central tax
authority
Employment EMPLOY Total number of people affiliated to 2015 Social Security INE
the Social Security system / Total
population of the destination
Explanatory variables
Demographics POPU Number of inhabitants in the 2015 INE Municipal
destination Register of
PIMRES Percentage of immigrant residents 2015 Inhabitants
Tourism supply PLHOT Hotel beds registered in the 2015 IVE Municipal and
destination District Tourism
PLAPA Beds in apartments registered in the 2015 Supply
destination
TOTREGL Total regulated beds in the 2015
destination
PVPUT Percentage of properties potentially 2011 INE Population
used for tourism (second residence) and housing
in the destination census
Economic UNEMP Unemployment rate with respect to 2015 Ministry of Labour,
situation the potentially active population Social Security and
National Statistics
Office
Human PREHUX Maximum municipal human 2015 White paper on
pressure pressure in the destination tourism of the
Region of Valencia
Composition of RATIO Ratio between Own elaboration
the supply TOTALREGL/PVPUT11
Province PROVINCE Categorical variable representing Own elaboration
territorial administrative subdivision
(Alicante, Castellón and Valencia) of
the region.
In order to complete the analysis by considering potential confounders, such as the population of the
destination or the extent to which the tourism specialisation could be affecting income or
unemployment in the two kinds of destination, a regression analysis by ordinary least squares (OLS)
has been carried out. According to Angrist & Pischke (2009:34) “regression estimates provide a valuable
baseline for almost all empirical research because regression is tightly linked to the conditional
expectation function, and the conditional expectation function provides a natural summary of empirical
relationship”. All analyses have been conducted using the R statistical language version 3.5.1 (R Core,
2018) and Gretl (Cottrell & Lucchetti, 2007). This methodology has been intensively used by previous
studies on the topic (see e.g. Perles, Ramón, Sevilla & Moreno, 2016).
Results
Table 3 shows the descriptive statistics of the variables analysed, both as a whole and broken down
according to the type of destination. By examining the table, it can be observed the differentiation
8
between the two groups based on the RATIO variable, whose aggregated mean is 0.21, with 0.38
corresponding to the registered supply group and 0.04 to the non-registered accommodation supply.
Table 3. Descriptive analysis of variables

All observations Registered group Non-registered group
N=54 N=27 N=27
Variable Mean Standard Mean Standard Mean Standard
deviation deviation deviation
INCOME 18,053 2,300 17,659 2,437 18,446 2,128
EMPLOYMENT 5,332 5,370 5,334 5,585 5,331 5,252
POPU 20,370 20,798 19,078 18,840 21,661 22,877
PIMRES 0.16 0.14 0.22 0.16 0.10 0.08
TOTREGL 6,015 11,448 10,263 15,013 1,767 2,078
PLHOT 1,610 5,621 2,884 7,795 336 522
PLAPA 3,347 5,031 5,715 6,163 978 1,395
PVPUT 30,357 40,532 25,984 24,269 34,730 52,155
UNEMP 0.12 0.02 0.11 0.02 0.12 0.02
PREHUX 2,026 1,858 1,690 1,567 2,362 2,086
RATIO 0.21 0.24 0.38 0.24 0.04 0.03
Apart from this difference in the variable that defines the classification of the groups, few differences
can be observed between them. With respect to the variables of interest, the average disposable income
has a higher value in the group where the non-registered accommodation predominates than in the
registered accommodation group. The volume of employment, meanwhile, is practically identical in
both types of destination. In principle, this implies a counterintuitive result with respect to the findings
of the studies reviewed in the introduction of this article.
Table 4 shows the results of the t-test of differences of measures implemented with respect to the
disposable income and the employment in destinations. We can observe that there is no significant
difference either in the level of income or employment between the two types of destination. Again,
this implies a counterintuitive result with respect to the studies reviewed in the introduction of this
article.
As already mentioned, in order to correct the effect that potential cofounders may have, Tables 5 to 8
show the results of the linear regressions carried out with income and employment as dependent
variables.
Table 5 illustrates how the variables incorporated into the model have a low-medium explanatory power
over income (R2=0.35). The model diagnosis shows that collinearity is not an issue in the estimated
regression, with a maximum variance inflation factor (VIF) of 4.38 for the provincial dummy of Alicante.
As it is below the threshold of 10.0 it indicates not collinearity problems. The Ramsey RESET functional
specification test suggests that the linear model is adequate (p-value of F-test ranging from 0.11 for the
squares to only 0.29 for squares and cubes).
9
Table 4. NHST means difference between tourist destinations in the Region of Valencia
Variable Non- Registered Two p-value
Theoretical 95% Bootstrapped 95%
registered mean sample t- CI for means CI for means
mean test difference difference
INCOME 18,446 17,659 1.264 0.21 (-492.51, (-438.45, +1,926.92)
+2,066.88)
EMPLOY 5,331 5,334 -0.00 0.99 (-3,035.91, (-2,852.88,
3,030.06) +2,774.65)
Source: Authors’ own elaboration. Note: Non-parametric Wilcoxon rank sum tests also does not reject the null of
equality of means in all cases at 95 per cent significance level.
The analysis of the significant coefficients highlights that the average disposable income of the residents
(INCOME) is positively related to the size of the destination (POPU) and its building density (PREHUX)
and negatively related to the percentage of the residential immigrant population (PINMRES) and the
level of unemployment (UNEM). With respect to the variables of interest, it may be observed that the
hotel beds existing in the destinations (PLHOT) and the rental property places (PVPUT) are associated
to lower levels of income in the destination, as significant negative coefficients are obtained. On the
other hand, places in apartments and the provincial dummy variables are not significant. Therefore, it
seems that the higher or lower presence of registered accommodation in tourist destinations does not
translate into a higher or lower level of the well-being of its residents (measured through the average
disposable family income), once the effect of other relevant variables such as the size of the population
or the economic situation of the destination has been eliminated. Rather, it seems that, in general, a
greater tourism accommodation supply – irrespectively of whether it is registered or not – is associated
to lower levels of income in the destinations, which could be explained by other factors that are not
included in the model, such as the greater diversification or tourist specialisation in destinations. In this
sense, it is possible, for example, for a destination that is predominantly dependent on tourism as main
source of income to have lower income levels than a destination that also has other sources of income
with higher income levels.
In addition to the limited explanatory power of the estimated model, an analysis of residuals indicates
a lack of normality (χ2= 10.99, p-value=0.00). Therefore, in order to avoid possible deficiencies in the
inference of the previous results, paired bootstrap confidence intervals have been estimated based on
1,000 replications for the variables that reflect the accommodation supply (see Table 6). As we can see
in the third column, none of the variables are statistically significant - zero forms part of all of the
estimated confidence intervals - although if we observe the upper limit of the intervals, an important
difference can be seen between the theoretical interval and the bootstrap for the variable that represents
the existing hotel places in the destination (PLHOT), which, in this case, would be consistent with a
positive effect on the higher disposable incomes as observed for the apartment places and rental
property places. In conclusion, the result obtained from applying the bootstrap procedure partly
contradicts the result found in the previous paragraph as none of the variables that represent the supply
would now contribute to explaining the levels of disposable income in the destinations. While there is
a positive effect, it seems that it is more attributable to the hotel places existing in the destination than
to any other of the models that may be implemented.
Table 7 reproduces the analysis using the level of employment observed in the destination as a
dependent variable. In this case, and contrary to the regression for income, the model for employment
shows signs of overfitting (R2=0.96). The multicollinearity (as the explanatory variables are the same,
the results of this diagnosis are also the same as those in the previous regression) and functional
10
specification test (F-test ranging from 0.44 for the cubes-only specification to the 0.53 for the squares-
only specification) show no problems in the estimated model.
Table 5. OLS regression of Income level of destinations on explanatory variables

Coefficient Std. Error t-ratio p-value
const 24,252.3 2,751.69 8.814 <0.0001
PVPUT −0.0192 0.0091 −2.093 0.0422
POPU 0.0533 0.0224 2.378 0.0218
PREHUX 0.3377 0.1868 1.808 0.0775
PINMRES −9,021.17 2,634.39 −3.424 0.0013
UNEM −42,653.5 20,064.9 −2.126 0.0392
PLHOT −0.1011 0.0417 −2.421 0.0196
PLAPA 0.0471 0.0555 0.8489 0.4005
VALENCIA −729.578 957.429 −0.7620 0.4501
CASTELLON −1,464.90 1,083.58 −1.352 0.1833
R-squared 0.3520 Adjusted R-squared 0.2195
F(9, 44) 4.0432 P-value(F) 0.0007
Log-likelihood −482.4036 Akaike criterion 984.8071
Schwarz criterion 1,004.697 Hannan-Quinn 992.4779
Note: Heteroskedasticity-robust standard errors, variant HC1
Table 6. Theoretical and bootstrapped (pairs) 95% CI coefficients based on 1,000 repetitions
Coefficient Theoretical 95% CI for Bootstrapped 95% CI for
coefficients coefficients
PLHOT (-0.1853, -0.0169) (-0.1997, 1.6311)
PLAPA (-0.0647, 0.1591) (-0.3030, 0.1756)
PVPUT (-0.0377, -0.000) (-0.0588, 0.0137)
An examination of the significant coefficients reveals that, as in the case of income, the size of the
destinations (POPU) is associated to a positive effect on the level of employment. In this model, we can
also observe, as in the previous case, that the composition of the accommodation supply does affect the
dependent variable. Specifically, while the greater presence of hotel supply (PLHOT) is associated to
higher levels of employment in the destination, the greater presence of rental accommodation (PVPUT)
is associated to lower levels of employment.
As in the previous case, the model suffers from a lack of normality in the residuals (χ2=7.24, p-
value=0.02), which, again necessitates a bootstrap analysis of the coefficients of interest (Table 8). As
we can see in the last column of the table and contrary to what we can observe in Table 6, now the
negative effect associated to a greater presence of the supply of rental accommodation is clearly
confirmed. However, the coefficient associated to the hotel places is not significant. Furthermore, it
may be observed that in the upper limit of the intervals there is no longer an important difference
between the theoretical interval and the bootstrap for the variable that represents the hotel places
existing in the destinations (PLHOT). The conclusions would be slightly different to those of the
previous case, with a clearer association of higher levels of employment in destinations with a greater
hotel presence and lower levels where there is a greater presence of rental accommodation.
11
Table 7. OLS regression of Employment levels of destination on explanatory variables

Coefficient Std. Error t-ratio p-value
const 1,130.45 1,085.14 1.042 0.3032
PVPUT −0.0252 0.0063 −3.948 0.0003
POPU 0.2728 0.0145 18.71 <0.0001
PREHUX −0.0406 0.0693 −0.5860 0.5608
PINMRES −1,231.28 2,256.05 −0.5458 0.5880
UNEM −5,524.87 7,462.84 −0.7403 0.4630
PLHOT 0.1635 0.0343 4.759 <0.0001
PLAPA 0.0223 0.0508 0.4396 0.6624
VALENCIA −71.9052 957.076 −0.07513 0.9405
CASTELLON 245.398 835.199 0.2938 0.7703
R-squared 0.9686 Adjusted R-squared 0.9621
F(9, 44) 419.3284 P-value(F) <0.0001
Log-likelihood −446.4496 Akaike criterion 912.8991
Schwarz criterion 932.7890 Hannan-Quinn 920.5699
Note: Heteroskedasticity-robust standard errors, variant HC1
Table 8. Theoretical and bootstrapped (pairs) 95% CI coefficients based on 1000 repetitions
Coefficient Theoretical 95% CI for Bootstrapped 95% CI for
coefficients coefficients
PLHOT (0.0943, 0.2328) (-0.3645, 0.2566)
PLAPA (-0.0801, 0.1248) (-0.0972, 0.2200)
PVPUT (-0.0381, -0.0123) (-0.0455, -0.0086)
In summary, the analysis carried out indicates that, contrary to the findings of the studies mentioned
in the introduction, the composition of the accommodation supply, at least in the case of the coastal
destinations in the Region of Valencia, hardly affect the income of the residents of the destinations,
although a greater impact on the volume of employment of residents can be appreciated in hotel-based
destinations.
This result could have transcendental implications for the well-being of the population. As we have seen
in the introduction. it should be remembered that, according to Exceltur, there is clear evidence of the
greater economic impact of hotel destinations with respect to residential ones. However, with respect
to the population, although the hotel destinations may benefit from higher employment, there is no
evidence of higher income from the tourism activity. This result may give rise to greater discontent
among the resident population with respect to tourists and the economic activity due to an evident lack
of distribution of wealth.
Discussion
With respect to the behaviour of employment in tourist destinations, the results obtained coincide with
the findings of Perles-Ribes, Ramón-Rodríguez, Sevilla-Jiménez & Moreno-Izquierdo (2016) which
reveal a decline in the employment performance of the residential destinations during the latest
economic crisis. Jolliffe & Farnsworth (2003) or Santana (2005) reveal that the benefits of inbound
tourism and the quality of employment are highly dependent on tourism development and critically
analyse the employment conditions in tourism destinations.
12
Likewise, with regard to the income generated for residents, the absence of significant differences
between destinations confirms the findings of Perles-Ribes, Ramón-Rodríguez, Sevilla-Jiménez &
Moreno-Izquierdo (2018) using the retail supply in the destinations as a proxy for this income. It appears
that this absence of differences between the two types of destination, at least in the case of the sun and
beach destinations in Spain, could be a robust result.
However, the results obtained differ greatly to the large differences between the two types of
destinations suggested by the studies of the main association of tourism firms in Spain (Exceltur). The
results obtained in these studies raise new scientific questions of interest. First, leaving aside the legal
considerations and the problems that may arise for the market due to a possible presence of unfair
competition, it would be necessary to confirm, with alternative methodologies or new data, whether
there are indeed differences in the income or added value generated by the two types of accommodation
supply (registered versus not registered) as large as those suggested by the Exceltur studies. As
highlighted in the introduction section, differences of 11 to 1 in the year 2003 or 5 to 1 in 2015 in favour
of registered establishments should be reflected in the income of the residents of the different
destinations. However, the different studies carried out do not seem to confirm this reflection.
Difficulties arise when translating the theoretical differences obtained by Exceltur in an abstract
contemplation of the activity into observable differences in a defined territorial area of destinations.
This is due to the mixed configuration of many of the destinations which have an abundant supply of
both types of accommodation establishments and the difficulty in obtaining a precise classification of
the destinations (Perles-Ribes, Ivars-Baidal, Ramón-Rodríguez, Such-Devesa, 2019).
Second, if indeed new studies were to confirm such differences, the second question to be raised would
refer to the distribution mechanisms of the benefits generated by the tourism industry. Moreover, in
what way can this non-translation of the benefits of tourism activity into improvements in the situation
of the local population affect the social sustainability of tourist destinations? The literature that
examines social sustainability within tourism is scarce. It is mainly focused on the conflict between
hosts and guests but does not analyse social sustainability from the perspective of the income
distribution generated by tourism in the different development models.
In view of these results, and in a context of growing concern about issues such as over-tourism, the
lesson for academics and practitioners would be the need to pay more attention to the mechanisms of
distribution of the benefits generated by the tourism activity which is a topic that has received less
attention by researchers than those related to the competitiveness of destinations or the quantity of
benefits generated by the activity.
Conclusions
The tourism literature indicates that there are differences in terms of economic activity and the level of
employment generated by the different types of tourism implemented in tourism destinations.
Specifically, the previous literature points to relevant differences in favour of the registered
accommodation supply (hotels and apartments) as opposed to that made up of rental properties.
This article seeks to test, for a group of coastal destinations in the Region of Valencia, whether the
different composition of the accommodation supply and the different economic impact indicated by
the literature translates into a better well-being of the resident population, measured through available
income and the level of employment existing in the destinations. Therefore, after classifying the
destinations into two groups - those in which there is a predominance of registered accommodation
13
and those where there is a majority of non-registered accommodation - statistical procedures have been
used to analyse the existence of significant differences in the levels of family income and employment
between the two types of destination.
The results obtained indicate the neutrality of the composition of the accommodation supply on these
variables. Neither through exploratory analysis nor through ordinary regression analysis techniques is
it possible to obtain significant differences attributable to the composition of accommodation, once the
effect of other relevant variables that affect the analysis has been discounted. Only through advanced
techniques is it possible to obtain, with the data available for this case, a result that indicates that a
destination with a higher presence of hotels can be favourably related to higher volumes of employment.
On the contrary, a greater supply of rental accommodation is negatively associated to the level of
employment of the destination. Whether this higher or lower level of employment translates into higher
levels of disposable income of the residents of the destination is a matter for further discussion.
In conclusion, it seems clear that, at least in the case of the Region of Valencia, the large differences
between the different types of accommodation supply do not have any real reflection in the level of
well-being of the residents of the destinations. Despite the limitations of this brief study and the
difficulties encountered by the researchers in each stage, it opens the door to the possibility of carrying
out new studies that seek to generalise the findings of this study to a wider group of regions and
countries. They will also analyse in greater depth the mechanisms of distributing the economic activity
generated in the destinations and their repercussion on the well-being of the residents in terms of the
quality of the employment generated which is one of the true objectives of tourism competitiveness.
References
Almeida-García, F., Peláez-Fernández, M. Á., Balbuena-Vazquez, A., & Cortes-Macias, R. (2016).
Residents' perceptions of tourism development in Benalmádena (Spain). Tourism Management, 54,
259-274.
Angrist, J.D. & Pischke, J.S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics. An Empricist’s companion. Princeton
University Press. Princeton. New Jersey.
Aref, F. (2011). The effects of tourism on quality of life: A case study of Shiraz, Iran. Life Science Journal,
8(2), 26-30.
Brida, J. G., Riaño, E., Such-Devesa, M. J., & Zapata-Aguirre, S. (2012). Valoración del turismo de cruceros
por parte de la comunidad local: Cartagena de Indias. Scripta Nova. Revista electrónica de Geografía
y Ciencias Sociales, 16.
Cardoso, C., & Silva, M. (2018). Residents’ perceptions and attitudes towards future tourism
development: A challenge for tourism planners. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 10(6),
688-697.
Cottrell, A & Lucchetti, R. (2007). Gretl User Manual, http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/pub/gretl/manual/
Dwyer, L. & Kim, C. (2003). Destination competitiveness: determinants and indicators. Current Issues
in Tourism, 6 (5), 369-414.
Exceltur (2005). Impactos sobre el entorno, la economía y el empleo de los distintos modelos de desarrollo
turístico del litoral mediterráneo español, Baleares y Canarias.
URL:http://www.Exceltur.org/excel01/contenido/portal/encuentro/Sumario_residencial_completo.
pdf. (Accessed 15.12.2018)
Exceltur (2015). Alojamiento turístico en viviendas de alquiler. Impactos y retos asociados. Impactos
sociales y económicos sobre los destinos españoles derivados del exponencial aumento del alquiler de
viviendas turísticas de corta duración, impulsado por los nuevos modelos y canales de comercialización
P2P. URL: https://www.Exceltur.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Alojamiento-turístico-en-
14
viviendas-de-alquiler-Impactos-y-retos-asociados.-Informe-completo.-Exceltur.pdf (Accessed
15.12.2018)
Exceltur (2018a). Comunitat Valenciana, Impactur 2017. Estudio del Impacto Económico del Turismo
sobre la Economía y el Empleo. URL: https://www.exceltur.org/wp-
content/uploads/2018/12/IMPACTUR-Comunidad-Valenciana-2017.pdf (Accessed 15.12.2018)
Exceltur (2018b). Monitur. Monitor de competitividad turística relativa de las comunidades autónomas
españolas. URL: https://www.exceltur.org/monitur/ (Accessed 15.12.2018)
Filep S., & Deery M. (2010). Towards a Picture of Tourists’ Happiness. Tourism Analysis, 15 (4), 399-410.
Garcia, C., & Servera, J. (2003). Impacts of tourism development on water demand and beach
degradation on the island of Mallorca (Spain). Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography:
85(3‐4), 287-300.
Gartner, W.C. (1987). Environmental impacts of recreational home development. Annals of Tourism
Research, 14, 38-57.
Hall, C.M. (2015). Second homes planning, policy and governance. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism,
Leisure and Events, 7 (1), 1-14.
Herrero, C., Villar, A., & Soler, A. (2018). Las facetas del bienestar: una aproximación multidimensional
a la calidad de vida en España y sus comunidades autónomas (2006-2015). Fundación BBVA. Bilbao.
INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística de España (2017a). Frontur. Movimiento turístico en Fronteras.
URL:http://www.ine.es/dyngs/INEbase/es/operacion.htm?c=Estadistica_C&cid=1254736176996&m
enu=ultiDatos&idp=1254735576863 (Accessed 15.12.2018)
INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística de España (2017b). Familitur. Encuesta de turismo a residentes.
URL:http://www.ine.es/dyngs/INEbase/es/operacion.htm?c=Estadistica_C&cid=1254736176990&m
enu=ultiDatos&idp=1254735576863 (Accessed 15.12. 2018)
INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística de España (2018a). Encuesta de Condiciones de Vida. Satisfacción
global con la vida.
URL:http://www.ine.es/ss/Satellite?L=es_ES&c=INESeccion_C&cid=1259944627813&p=1254735110672&
pagename=ProductosYServicios%2FPYSLayout&param1=PYSDetalleFichaIndicador&param3=12599
37499084 (Accessed 07.6. 2019).
INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística de España (2018b). Contabilidad regional de España.
https://www.ine.es/dyngs/INEbase/es/operacion.htm?c=Estadistica_C&cid=1254736167628&menu=
resultados&idp=1254735576581 (Accessed 07.6. 2019)
Ivars-Baidal, J. A., I. Rodríguez-Sánchez & Vera-Rebollo, J.F. (2013). The evolution of mass tourism
destinations: New approaches beyond deterministic models in Benidorm (Spain). Tourism
Management, 34, 184-195.
Liang, Z. X., & Hui, T. K. (2016). Residents’ quality of life and attitudes toward tourism development in
China. Tourism Management, 57, 56-67.
Mazón, T. (2006a). Inquiring into Residential Tourism: The Costa Blanca Case. Tourism and Hospitality
Planning & Development, 3 (2), 90-97.
Moreno-Izquierdo, L., J. F., Ramón-Rodríguez, A. B., Such-Devesa, M. J., & Perles-Ribes, J. F. (2019):
Tourist environment and online reputation as a generator of added value in the sharing economy:
The case of Airbnb in urban and sun- and-beach holiday destinations. Journal of Destination
Marketing and Management, 11, 53-66.
Modica, P. & Uysal, M. (2016). Island Tourism: Sustainability, Competitiveness, and Quality- of-Life. CABI
Series in Tourism Management Research.
Morote, F.A., Saurí, D., & Hernández, M. (2016). Residential Tourism, Swimming Pools, and Water
Demand in the Western Mediterranean. The Professional Geographer, 69(1), 1-11.
Nawijn, J., & Mitas, O. (2012). Resident attitudes to tourism and their effect on subjective well-being:
The case of Palma de Mallorca. Journal of Travel Research, 51(5), 531-541.
15
Obrador, P. (2017). The end of sustainability? A note on the changing politics of mass tourism in the
Balearic Islands. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 9(2), 205-208.
Perles-Ribes, J., Ramón-Rodríguez, A. & Sevilla-Jiménez, M. (2011). Determinants of the competitive
advantage of residential tourism destinations in Spain. Tourism Economics, 17(2), 373-403
Perles-Ribes, J., Ramón-Rodríguez, A., Sevilla-Jiménez, M. & Moreno-Izquierdo, L. (2016).
Unemployment effects of economic crises on hotel and residential tourism destinations: The case of
Spain. Tourism Management, 54 (C), 356-368.
Perles-Ribes, J.F, Ramón Rodríguez, A.B, Sevilla Jiménez, M. & Moreno-Izquierdo, L. (2018). Differences
in the economic performance of hotel based and residential tourist destinations measured by their
retail activity. Evidence from Spain. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(18), 2076-2107
Perles-Ribes, J. F., Ramón-Rodríguez, A. B., Ivars-Baidal, J., & Such-Devesa, M. J. (2018). The use of
private vehicles in residential and holiday tourism destinations: the case of Spain. Current Issues in
Tourism, 1-20.
Perles-Ribes, J.F., Ivars-Baidal, J., Ramón-Rodríguez, A.B. & Vera-Rebollo, J.F. (2019). The typological
classification of tourist destinations: The region of Valencia, a case study. Tourism Economics,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816619838413
Postma, A., & Schmuecker, D. (2017). Understanding and overcoming negative impacts of tourism in
city destinations: conceptual model and strategic framework. Journal of Tourism Futures, 3(2), 144-
156.
R Core Team (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for
Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/.
Ritchie, J.B., & Crouch, G.I. (2003). The competitive destination: A sustainable tourism perspective.
Wallingford: Cabi.
Sirakaya, E., Teye, V., & Sönmez, S. (2002). Understanding residents’ support for tourism development
in the central region of Ghana. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 57-67.
Spence, A. M., Hazard, H. A., & Kennedy, J.F. (1988). International competitiveness. The International
Executive, 30(1), 32-34.
Vera, J. F. & Ivars, J. A. (2003). Measuring sustainability in a mass tourist destination: pressures,
perceptions and policy responses in Torrevieja, Spain. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(2-3), 181-
203.
16
Literary tourism as a field of research over the period 1997-2016
Samet Çevik 1*
1
Bandırma Onyedi Eylül University, Erdek Vocational School, Department of Tourism and Hotel Management,
Balıkesir, Turkey. E-mail: scevik@bandirma.edu.tr
Abstract
Although literary tourism is not a new concept, the academic research in this field has not been able to reach
adequate level since it has not come to the forefront yet as a tourism type in many parts of the world. This study
aims at examining literary tourism as a field of research and determining its situation within tourism studies
through a literature review. 132 articles over the period 1997-2016 included in the study were analysed regarding the
journals they were published, research methods, research areas, literary tourism types and research themes by using
content analysis technique. Although the study found that literary tourism is a wide-range academic field with its
eight types and its relations with many tourism types and other social sciences as an interdisciplinary field, it also
revealed academic research is limited except many regions of Europe. Literary tourism studies demonstrate that
literary tourism has high research potential as an academic field since the results of studies show that literary
tourism research cannot be generalised and they can vary according to literary figures. The studies also point out
that literary tourism provides numerous benefits to destinations when developed as a special interest tourism type.
Keywords: Tourism research, literature review, literary tourism, literary tourists, literary place
Citation: Çevik, S. (2020). Literary tourism as a field of research over the period 1997-2016. European Journal of
Tourism Research 24, 2407.

RESEARCH PAPER 1
Introduction
Literary tourism which is a significant and growing sector of the tourism industry originates when the
popularity of a literary depiction or the stature of an individual author is such that people are drawn to
visit the places that the author wrote about or was associated with (Busby & Klug, 2001, p. 319). In many
countries, especially in the UK, literary tourism is an increasingly important and popular type of
tourism. As Watson (2006, p. 5) asserts in her book:
‘literary tourism is so naturalised as a cultural phenomenon in the British Isles that one
sees literary sites detailed in guidebooks and marked on the road map, and expects (and
feels expected) to visit the museum shop and to buy the soap, the postcard and the
bookmark’
The development of literary tourism has caused the transformation of literary places to contribute to
tourism development and stimulate the local economy rather than experiencing the settings of the
authors’ works or working environments (Müller, 2006). This is because, literary tourism has a wide
range of activities including visiting places associated with authors such as houses, graves, museums
etc., participating literary events like festivals or commemorations and participating organised literary
tours. So destinations, whether rural or urban, have advantages to present and develop themselves in
numerous ways through literary tourism (Topler, 2016). One of the advantages is about revenues from
literary tourism activities (Fox, 2008). Destinations that promote literary tourism activities as an
attraction will benefit from the revenue generator effect of these activities depending on the increasing
number of tourists. According to Fox, uniqueness in another benefit of literary tourism. In other words,
tourists cannot find the same activities at another destination and cannot have similar experiences.
Despite these benefits of literary tourism and increasing interest; the relationship between tourism and
literature as a special interest has still remained in the background although it has very important
potential sources in many parts of the world. In a similar manner, in the academic context, literary
tourism remains an under-researched area (Smith, 2003) than the other types of special interest
tourism. However, literary tourism is a type of tourism which has close relations with many types of
tourism and has different types in itself. Therefore, the role of academic studies in the field cannot be
denied in the development of literary tourism in line with the potential sources and in increasing the
utilization rate of its benefits.
In this study which presents a review of the literature on literary tourism, aims to determine the
situation of literary tourism as an academic field. Depending on this purpose, six research questions
have been developed in the study and in the light of these questions; it has been identified the
distribution of literary tourism studies by years, in which journals they published, which research
methodologies they applied, which geographies and which countries they chose, which types of literary
tourism they researched and which theme they investigate. Based upon these research questions,
literary tourism was investigated as a field of research through literary tourism studies published from
1997 to 2016 in the study.
It is thought that this study will contribute to increasing the awareness of literary tourism as an
academic field by determining the research topics in literary tourism and by presenting information
about the contents and the results of the studies carried out in this field. The implications obtained
from the study are significant in terms of indicating which activities are in the scope of literary tourism
and in which areas of this type of tourism are inadequate in academic research. Hence, it can be said
that the implications of the study serve as a guide to the researchers in this field for future studies.
2
Çevik (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2407
Literature Review
Defining Literary Tourism
As a type of special interest tourism, literary tourism sits the intersection of cultural tourism and
heritage tourism. While some researchers have evaluated literary tourism under heritage tourism
(Herbert, 2001; Smith, 2003; Square, 1996); some researchers have considered literary tourism as a part
of cultural tourism (Fox, 2008; Robinson & Andersen, 2002; Stiebel, 2004). Robinson & Andersen (2002,
p. xiii) assert that literary tourism should be considered as the branch of cultural tourism regarding
anthropological sense: It involves tourists and visitors identifying with, discovering, and creating
signifiers of cultural values with those people who have become part of the cultural mythologies of
places. On the other hand, according to the authors, it is a distinctive type as aesthetic cultural tourism
due to it is based on creative arts. Because literature is not like other art forms. As distinct from visual
arts and music, the author and the reader are closer to sharing the art, the reader can easily be included
in the author’s world. Substantially, cultural tourism and heritage tourism are very close to each other.
Hoppen, Brown, & Fyall (2014) state that the fundamental difference between these two types of tourism
is that heritage tourism is mostly a place-based tourism type. However, since heritage tourism also
includes values such as people, architecture, traditions, artifacts and local histories, there is a great
overlap between cultural tourism and heritage tourism. This is also valid for literary tourism because it
covers both the characteristics of cultural tourism (e.g. cultural attractions such as literary figures,
fictional characters, literary festivals etc.) and heritage tourism (e.g. visiting authors’ houses or other
author-related places) (Baleiro and Quinteiro, 2018: 31).
Literary tourism is closely related to many types of tourism including culture. For instance, visiting the
graves of authors is also considered within literary tourism. It indicates that literary tourism is closely
related to dark tourism. Another example indicating the relationship between literary tourism and dark
tourism is the house Anne Frank was hidden between 1941-1944 who is the author of the world-famous
book ‘The Diary of Anne Frank’ which is located in Amsterdam and services as museum-house. Literary
tourism also has a close relationship with event tourism. As an essential product of literary tourism, the
number of literary festivals is increasing every year and they are getting more popular. Another area
that literary tourism has a close relationship is media which also contains popular culture. In their study,
Busby & Klug (2001) have discussed literary tourism together with film and television tourism under the
heading of media-related tourism.
Literary Tourism Types

Besides being close to many tourism types, literary tourism is divided into many sub-categories within
itself. There are various studies classify types of literary tourism. However, the first and most widely
accepted study is Butler’s (1986) study. Subsequent studies have adapted this classification of Butler or
improved this classification by adding new literary tourism types. Butler’s classification consists of four
categories (Butler, 1986 cited in Busby & Klug, 2001, p. 321):
1. Aspects of homage to an actual location: This classification mostly includes the actual places associated
with an author. These sites are usually the house where the author was born, lived or died, the house or
another place where the author wrote his works and the graveyard of the author. Robinson (2002)
suggests that the house of the author is arguably the most powerful tourism resource with appeal across
a range of markets. Authors’ houses allow tourists to engage in several emotional experiences and
activities. These places are a source of intimacy, authenticity and insight into the mystery.
2. Places of significance in the work of fiction: Tourists may be drawn to literary places that form the
settings for novels. Fiction may be set in locations that authors knew, and there is a merging of the real,
3
and the imagined that gives such places a special meaning. Fictional characters and events often
generate the strongest imagery (Herbert, 2001, p. 314).
3. Appeal of areas because they were appealing to literary and other figures: This category includes
destinations that address literary figures. It contains the development and marketing exercises of
destinations by the public and private sector in terms of literary tourism.
4. The literature gains popularity in a sense that the area becomes a tourist destination in its own right:
This category implies that a destination turns into a touristic destination without any effort by the
popularity of an author or a literary work.
Busby & Klug (2001, p. 321) who proposed ‘travel writing’ as the fifth type of literary tourism defined
travel writing as ‘a vehicle through which places and people have been reinterpreted and communicated
to wider audiences’. Studies in this type of literary tourism are usually conducted through guidebooks.
The guidebook is a crucial part of the touristic process because it mediates the relationship between
tourist and destination, as well as the relationship between host and guest. (Bhattacharyya, 1997, p. 372).
‘Film-induced literary tourism’ was proposed by Busby & Laviolette (2006, p. 149) as the sixth type of
literary tourism. The authors defined film-induced literary tourism as ‘tourism resulting from enhanced
interest in a destination, secured through reading the literature after viewing the screenplay’. The seventh
and eighth types of literary tourism were suggested in the published report by Mintel (2011). These types
Mintel suggested are ‘literary festivals’ and ‘bookshop tourism’. As mentioned in Mintel’s report, literary
festivals as especially in the UK there are a vast number of yearly events in which participants can
interact with the authors or other celebrities easily as well as the authors have the chance to promote
their literary works. Bookshop tourism which is the eighth type of literary tourism is the visitation of
tourists to local bookshops for the destination-related works such as guidebooks and maps or books
written by local authors (Hoppen, Brown, & Fyall, 2014 as cited in Mintel, 2011).
Methodology
This paper aims to provide an assessment of the current status of literary tourism as a field of research.
In addition, this review of literary tourism also provides guiding implications for future studies. Content
analysis technique was used to determine the status of literary tourism as a research field. Neuman
(2014, p. 377-378) asserted that the content analysis study consisted of 6 stages: 1- formulate the research
question, 2- decide on units of analysis, 3-develop a sampling plan, 4- construct coding categories and
a recording sheet, 5- coding and intercoder reliability check, 6- data collection and analysis.
In the first stage, six sub-research questions were developed depending on the main purpose of the
research. In this context, the study seeks to answer these following questions:
1. How is the distribution of publications across the period?

2. In which journals were these studies published?
3. Which research methodologies were applied?
4. Which geographies and which countries were chosen as research area?
5. Which types of literary tourism were researched?
6. Which themes were investigated in these studies?
In the next stage, the articles to be included in the analysis were limited to a period of 20 years. This
paper focuses on the studies on literary tourism published between 1997-2016 regarding their
distribution by years, the journals they were published, their research methods, research areas, literary
4
tourism types and research themes. Afterwards, articles on literary tourism were gathered from
academic databases. In order to ensure the comprehensiveness of the study, six academic databases
including EBSCOHost, Science Direct, Taylor & Francis, Emerald, Sage Premier and Google Scholar
were included. In February – August 2017 period, articles on literary tourism and literary tourism types
were identified and gathered from these databases by searching the keywords ‘literary tourism’,
‘literature and tourism’ and ‘literary tourist’. At the first stage, 98 articles related to these keywords were
reached. After the inclusion of these articles, the references of each article were overviewed, and 37
more articles related to literary tourism and its types (travel writing, literary festivals, bookshop tourism
etc.) were reached. After reviewing these articles, 3 articles were excluded from the study due to the fact
that they were not carried out on the basis of literature and tourism relationship. Totally 132 articles
which were published in English language peer-reviewed journals between 1997-2016 were included in
the study. Books, dissertations, book reviews, conference proceedings or abstracts are excluded from
this study.
After retrieving the articles, on MS Word 2016 a recording sheet consisting of the name, author, journal,
research method, research area, literary tourism type and related theme sections were created. Before
starting the data analysis, the articles are classified according to the year of publication. Thereafter, the
journals where the articles were published, research methods and research areas of articles were
determined. Next, the articles were analysed again in detail and it was determined that the studies were
conducted within the context of which of the eight literary tourism types and the themes were revealed
by determining the concepts emphasized in the articles.
Results
This section provides the findings of the distribution of literary tourism articles by years, the academic
journals they were published, the research methods they applied, their research areas, literary tourism
types they were categorised and literary tourism themes they investigated.
Number of publications by years

The distribution of the publications in the research period (1997-2016) is displayed in Figure 1.
Considering to the distribution of academic studies in the field of literary tourism over the past two
decades, it is not possible to say that there is a steady increase or decrease in the annual number of
studies. Figure 1 shows that the number of studies is fluctuating. Accordingly, it is not possible to say
that the awareness of literary tourism and the interest of the researchers have increased after a certain
period. However, in 2016 there was a boom in the number of studies in this field, and the number of
studies increased by 120% compared to the previous year. If this increase in 2016 continues regularly in
the following years, it can be said that 2016 will be a milestone in the literary tourism research.
The journals in which articles were published

According to the distribution of academic journals, the majority of publications were published in
academic journals only in the field of tourism (52.27%, N = 69). These journals are shown as italic in
Table 1. As can be seen from Table 1, Annals of Tourism Research, Journal of Tourism and Cultural
Change, Tourism Geographies and Tourist Studies are the journals that have more articles published on
literary tourism. Other journals are interdisciplinary journals in which publications from other fields of
social sciences are also included. In addition, academic journals in literature field publish studies in the
context of literary tourism.
5
Table 1. The journals in which literary tourism studies were published from 1997 to 2016
International Journal of Culture,
Annals of Tourism Research 10 1
Tourism and Hospitality Research
Journal of Tourism and Cultural International Journal of
8 1
Change Francophone Studies
International Journal of Language,
Tourism Geographies 6 Translation and Intercultural 1
Communication
International Journal of Regional
Tourist Studies 6 1
and Local History
JASAL Journal of the Association
International Journal of Tourism
5 for the Study of Australian 1
Research
Literature
Journalism and Mass
European Journal of Cultural Studies 4 1
Communication
European Journal of Tourism, Journal of Biodiversity and
4 1
Hospitality and Recreation Environmental Sciences
Journal of Destination Marketing
Tourism Recreation Research 4 1
& Management
Continuum: Journal of Media & Journal of Hospitality Marketing &
3 1
Cultural Studies Management
European Romantic Review 3 Journal of Human Ecology 1
Journal of Policy Research in
Journal of Travel Research 3 1
Tourism, Leisure and Events
Journal of Tourism Consumption
Tourism Management 3 1
and Practice
Current Writing: Text and Reception
2 Journal of Tourism & Hospitality 1
in Southern Africa
International Journal of Cultural
2 Journal of Vacation Marketing 1
Studies
International Journal of Heritage
2 Journal of Victorian Culture 1
Studies
Journal of Heritage Tourism 2 Journeys 1
Lit: Literature Interpretation
Journal of Historical Geography 2 1
Theory
Lucrări Ştiinţifice Management
2 Literary Geographies 1
Agricol
Metro Magazine: Media &
The Cartographic Journal 2 1
Education Magazine
Acta Turistica 1 Mousaion 1
AlmaTourism: Journal of Tourism,
1 Museum History Journal 1
Culture and Territorial Development
Anatolia: An International Journal of New Review of Film and
1 1
Tourism and Hospitality Television Studies
Annals of the Association of
1 Nineteenth-Century Contexts 1
American Geographers
6
Nineteenth Century Theatre and

Arab World English Journal 1 1
Film
Research Journal of Agricultural
Area 1 1
Science
Scandinavian Journal of
Art History 1 1
Hospitality and Tourism
Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism
1 Scrutiny2 1
Research
Caribbean Quarterly: A Journal of
1 Social & Cultural Geography 1
Caribbean Culture
Changing English 1 Studies in Popular Culture 1
Christianity and Literature 1 Studies in Romanticism 1
Critical Arts: South-North Cultural TOURISM – An International
1 1
and Media Studies Interdisciplinary Journal
Tourism and Hospitality Planning
Critical Survey 1 1
& Development
Dos Algarves: A Multidisciplinary E-
1 TOURISM Case Study 1
Journal
Tourism, Culture &
ELH 1 1
Communication
TOURISM: Preliminary
Food, Culture & Society 1 1
Communication
Transactions of the Institute of
Geoforum 1 1
British Geographers
History Compass 1 Twentieth - Century Literature 1
Interdisciplinary Management
1 Western Historical Quarterly 1
Research
Informatol 1 Women’s Studies 1
Figure 1. Number of publications in the period of 1997-2016

Research methods
7
This section presents data about research methods of studies. Table 2 shows that a large number of
papers published is empirical research.
Table 2. Research methods applied by literary tourism studies

Conceptual Empirical
8 6.06% 124 93.94%
Quantitative Qualitative Mixed
9 7.26% 107 86.29% 8 6.45%
Only 6% of the papers were designed as conceptual paper and conceptually examined issues related to
literary tourism (N = 8). For example, in one of these studies, Hoppen, Brown, & Fyall (2014) discussed
the opportunities and challenges of literary tourism concerning destination marketing and branding.
Quantitative papers comprise 7,26% of all publications (N = 9). The majority of these studies tried to
determine characteristics, motivations, expectation and satisfaction levels of literary tourists (Busby &
Devereux, 2015; Busby & Klug, 2001; Busby & Shetliffe, 2013; Fairer-Wessels, 2010; Herbert, 2001) or the
reactions of residents in literary related destinations (Busby, Brunt, & Lund, 2003) using the
questionnaire technique. A limited number of studies conducted mixed method research in which
quantitative and qualitative methods were used together (6,45%, N = 8). Some of these papers, on the
one hand, were tried to determine the attitudes of literary tourists by quantitative techniques while on
the other hand they gathered data by qualitative methods from the authorities about the issues such as
marketing or management of literary places (Carl, Kindon, & Smith, 2007; Smith, 2003) or from the
related books (Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa, 2007; Ryan, Yanning, Huimin, & Song, 2009).
Amongst literary tourism studies reviewed, the majority of papers are qualitative; they account for
86.29% (N = 107) of all published empirical papers. The use of qualitative methods in literary tourism
research indicates that the results of studies cannot be generalised and can vary depending on literary
figures, literary places or destinations. Therefore, in these studies case study design was the most
commonly used qualitative research design. Besides, some of the studies adopted the ethnographic
approach and most of them were carried out by using auto-ethnography (Beeton, 2010; Brown, 2016a;
Gentile & Brown, 2015; Ridanpää, 2011; Spooner, 2014; Stiebel, 2013). Observation and interview
techniques were mostly applied to gather data in qualitative studies. In addition, a considerable amount
of studies, especially in travel writing type, used textual analysis, document analysis or discourse analysis
techniques to gather data.
Research areas
The results of the present study demonstrate that literary tourism research has a wide geographical
distribution. Table 3 presents data about research areas of studies.
The majority of literary tourism studies chose a specific region or only a literary place or a literary figure
within that specific region as a research area (N = 120). The rest of the papers introduced comparative
results by incorporating several different regions into the survey (Cohen-Hattab & Kerber, 2004;
Hazard, 2016; McLaughlin, 2016; Robertson & Yeoman, 2014; van Es & Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b; Wallace,
2009). Literary tourism studies were conducted in 33 different regions across Africa, America, Asia,
Europe and Oceania. The most substantial proportion of all papers chose a part of Europe as a research
area (N = 70), and approximately half of these studies were conducted in the UK (N = 33).
8
Table 3. Research areas chosen by literary tourism studies

Egypt Dunn (2006)
Africa 5 The Republic
Fairer-Wessels (2010); Stiebel (2004); Stiebel (2007); Stiebel (2010)
of South Africa
Cohen-Hattab & Kerber (2004); Fawcett & Cormack (2001); Gothie (2016);
Canada
Lerena (2015)
Central
Dym (2004)
America 16 America
Cassell (2016); Chiang (2004); Delyser (2003); Hazard (2016); Jortner (2013);
USA McLaughlin (2016); Santos (2006); van Es & Reijnders (2016a, 2016b);
Watson (2013); Waysdorf & Reijnders (2016)
Jia (2009); Jiang & Xu (2016a, 2016b); Robertson & Yeoman (2014); Ryan,
China
Yanning, Huimin, & Song (2009); Yu & Xu (2016)
Hong Kong Wong & Liu (2011)
Indonesia McGregor (2000); O’Connor & Kim (2014)
India Bhattacharyya (1997)
Asia 17
Iran Beigi, Ramesht, & Azani (2015); Johnson (2010)
Israel Cohen-Hattab & Kerber (2004)
Japan Nishimura, Waryszak, & King (2006, 2007)
South Korea Lee & Weaver (2014)
Tajikistan Bidaki & Hosseini (2014)
Albania Erkoçi (2016)
Croatia Fox (2008)
Brown (2016a, 2016b); McClinchey (2015); Petroman, Petroman, &
France
Brătulescu (2008); Robertson & Radford (2009)
Greece Busby & O’Neill (2006); O’Neill, Butts, & Busby (2005)
Alghureiby (2015); Ashworth & Ashworth (1998); Johnson (2004); O’Connor
Ireland
& Kim (2014); Wallace (2009)
Italy Gentile & Brown (2015); Rossetti (2016); Stiebel (2013)
Netherlands Busby & Devereux (2015); Hartmann (2013)
Portugal Marques & Cunha (2013)
Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa (2007); Light (2007); Muresan & Smith (1998);
Romania Petroman, Csaholczi, Negrut, Marin, & Petroman (2016); Reijnders (2011);
Tolic, Petroman, Petroman, Bălan, & Popa (2009)
Russia Wallace (2009)
Europe 70 Slovenia Topler (2016)
Spain Busby, Korstanje, & Mansfield (2011); Scarfuto (2013)
Jenkins (2011); Müller (2006); Ridanpää (2011); van Es & Reijnders (2016a,
Sweden
2016b)
Switzerland McLaughlin (2016)
Turkey Tekgül (2016)
Bhandari (2008); Booth (2008); Busby & Klug (2001); Busby & Shetliffe
(2013); Busby, Brunt, & Lund (2003); Cohen-Hattab & Kerber (2004); Cooper
& Gregory (2011); Donaldson, Gregory, & Murrieta-Flores (2015); Earl (2008);
Frost & Laing (2014); Gibson (2006); Gilbert (1999); Herbert (2001); Lee
UK (2012); MacLeod, Hayes, & Slater (2009); Martin-Jones (2014); McLaughlin
(2016); Nixon (2014); O’Connor & Bolan (2008); Philips (2011); Plate (2006);
Robertson & Radford (2009); Santesso (2004); Seaton (1999); Smith (2003);
Spooner (2014); Ulin (2009); van Es & Reijnders (2016a, 2016b); Watkins &
Herbert (2003); Westover (2012); Young (2015); Zemgulys (2000)
Beeton (2010); Carson, Hawkes, Gislason, & Martin (2013); Carson, Hawkes,
Oceania 19 Australia
Gislason, & Cantrell (2016); Driscoll (2015); Driscoll (2016); Frost (2006);
9
Johanson & Freeman (2012); Nishimura, Waryszak, & King (2006, 2007);
Robertson & Yeoman (2014); Stewart (2010); Yiannakis & Davies (2012)
Buchmann, Moore, & Fisher (2010); Carl, Kindon, & Smith (2007); Croy
New Zealand
(2010); Pan & Ryan (2007); Peaslee (2011); Tzanelli (2004)
Pitcairn
Amoamo (2013)
Islands
Literary tourism types

The publications examined in the present study were analysed within the frame of eight literary tourism
types above-mentioned. The majority of papers contain one literary tourism type (N = 86), whilst some
of the papers consist of two or three literary tourism types (N = 43). Table 4 provides data about the
distribution of literary tourism types the papers contain.
There are 22 papers in the first category which is about actual places associated with authors such as
birthplaces, houses, workplaces or graves. This represents 16,66% of all papers. In this category, many
of the studies investigated the houses of authors associated with Europe which are open to tourism
today. These authors are Dylan Thomas, Jane Austen (Herbert, 2001); John Milton (Santesso, 2004);
Robert Burns (Bhandari, 2008); Mary Russell Mitford (Booth, 2008); Honoré de Balzac (Petroman,
Petroman, & Brătulescu, 2008); Vladimir Nabokov, Alexander Pushkin (Wallace, 2009); Virginia Woolf
(Robertson & Radford, 2009); Lord Byron (Busby & Shetliffe, 2013); Anne Frank (Busby & Devereux,
2015; Hartmann, 2013) and Gabriele D’Annunzio (Gentile & Brown, 2015). Visits to authors’ graves are
also included in this type of literary tourism. In his study Westover (2009) analysed the book of William
Goodwin’s titled Essay on Sepulchres which is about visiting graves or in other words, necromanticism.
Regarding this issue, autoethnographic research was conducted by Tolic, Petroman, Petroman, Bălan,
& Popa (2009) to the grave of Eugène Ionesco and by Brown (2016b) to the graves of Jean-Paul Sartre
and Simone de Beauvoir.
39 studies were conducted comprising fictional places or characters in the works of authors which is
the second type of literary tourism. These papers comprise 29.54% of all publications. In some of these
studies, landscapes of destinations associated with fictional works of authors were chosen as a research
topic. For example; Limerick in Franck McCourt’s Angela’s Ashes (Ashworth & Ashworth, 1998), Chelsea
in Virginia Woolf’s Night and Day (Zemgulys, 2000), Southern California in Helen Hunt Jackson’s
Ramona (Delyser, 2003), Dublin in James Joyce’s Dubliners (Johnson, 2004), Monterey in John
Steinbeck’s Cannery Row (Chiang, 2004), Madrid in Marc Lambron’s L’Impromptu de Madrid and
Antonio Munoz Molina’s Mysteries of Madrid (Busby, Korstanje, & Mansfield, 2011), Gjirokastra in İsmail
Kadare’s Chronicle in Stone (Erkoçi, 2016). In the remaining papers, fictional characters and touristic
values of these characters concerning their relevant destinations were investigated. These characters
are; Bram Stoker’s Dracula character (Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa, 2007; Light, 2007; Muresan & Smith,
1998; Reijnders, 2011), Lucy Maud Montgomery’s Anne Shirley character (Fawcett & Cormack, 2001;
Gothie, 2016); Ned Kelly character (Frost, 2006); Håkan Nesser’s Van Veeteren character (Jenkins, 2011);
J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter character (Lee, 2012; Waysdorf & Reijnders, 2016); Michael Ondaatje’s Anna
character (Robertson & Radford, 2009); Ian Fleming’s James Bond character (Reijnders, 2010); Sir Arthur
Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes character (McLaughlin, 2016; van Es & Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b);
Raymond Chandler’s Philip Marlowe character (van Es & Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b); Stieg Larsson’s Lisbeth
Salander character (van Es & Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b).
10
Table 4. The distribution of literary tourism types

Bhandari (2008); Booth (2008); Brown (2016a, 2016b); Busby & Devereux (2015);
Busby & Shetliffe (2013); Fawcett & Cormack (2001); Gentile & Brown (2015);
Aspects of Hartmann (2013); Hazard (2016); Herbert (2001); Smith (2003); Petroman,
1. homage to an 22 Petroman, & Brătulescu (2008); Petroman, Csaholczi, Negrut, Marin, & Petroman
actual location (2016); Robertson & Radford (2009); Santesso (2004); Stiebel (2013); Tolic,
Petroman, Petroman, Bălan, & Popa (2009); Wallace (2009); Watson (2013);
Westover (2009); Young (2015)
Ashworth & Ashworth (1998); Beeton (2010); Buchmann, Moore, & Fisher (2010);
Busby & O’Neill (2006); Busby, Brunt, & Lund (2003); Busby, Korstanje, &
Mansfield (2011); Carl, Kindon, & Smith (2007); Chiang (2004); Cosma, Pop, &
Negrusa (2007); Croy (2010); Delyser (2003); Erkoçi (2016); Fairer-Wessels (2010);
Places of
Fawcett & Cormack (2001); Frost (2006); Frost & Laing (2014); Gothie (2016);
significance in
2. 39 Jenkins (2011); Johnson (2004); Lee (2012); Light (2007); McLaughlin (2016);
the work of
Muresan & Smith (1998); Murray-Román (2009); O’Connor & Bolan (2008);
fiction
O’Neill, Butts, & Busby (2005); Peaslee (2011); Perkin (2008); Reijnders (2010);
Reijnders (2011); Robertson & Radford (2009); Rubiés & Bacon (2000); Ryan,
Yanning, Huimin, & Song (2009); Tekgül (2016); Tzanelli (2004); van Es &
Reijnders (2016a, 2016b); Waysdorf & Reijnders (2016); Zemgulys (2000)
Alghureiby (2015); Beeton (2010); Beigi, Ramesht, & Azani (2015); Bhandari (2008);
Bidaki & Hosseini (2014); Busby, Brunt, & Lund (2003); Carson, Hawkes, Gislason,
& Martin (2013); Carson, Hawkes, Gislason, & Cantrell (2016); Chiang (2004);
Cohen-Hattab & Kerber (2004); Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa (2007); Croy (2010); Earl
Appeal of areas (2008); Erkoçi (2016); Fox (2008); Frost (2006); Frost & Laing (2014); Gothie
because they (2016); Jia (2009); Jiang & Xu (2016a, 2016b); Lee (2012); Lee & Weaver (2014);
3. were appealing 51 Lerena (2015); Light (2007); MacLeod, Hayes, & Slater (2009); Marques & Cunha
to literary and (2013); Muresan & Smith (1998); Müller (2006); Nixon (2014); O’Connor & Bolan
other figures (2008); Peaslee (2011); Petroman, Csaholczi, Negrut, Marin, & Petroman (2016);
Plate (2006); Ridanpää (2011); Scarfuto (2013); Spooner (2014); Stiebel (2004);
Stiebel (2007); Stiebel (2010); Stiebel (2013); Topler (2016); Ulin (2009); van Es &
Reijnders (2016a, 2016b); Wallace (2009); Watkins & Herbert (2003); Watson
(2013); Waysdorf & Reijnders (2016); Yiannakis & Davies (2012); Yu & Xu (2016)
The literature
gains
popularity in a Ashworth & Ashworth (1998); Busby & O’Neill (2006); Carl, Kindon, & Smith
sense that the (2007); Chiang (2004); Fairer-Wessels (2010); Martin-Jones (2014); O’Neill, Butts,
4. 10
area becomes a & Busby (2005); Ridanpää (2011); Ryan, Yanning, Huimin, & Song (2009); Tzanelli
tourist (2004)
destination in
its own right
Amoamo (2013); Bhattacharyya (1997); Busby & O’Neill (2006); Caesar (1999);
Cohen-Hattab & Kerber (2004); Cooper & Gregory (2011); Dann (1999);
Donaldson, Gregory, & Murrieta-Flores (2015); Dunn (2006); Dym (2004); Gilbert
(1999); Hazard (2016); Johnson (2004); Johnson (2010); Jortner (2013); Kilbride
5. Travel Writing 34 (2011); McClinchey (2015); McCracken-Flesher (2016); McGregor (2000);
McLaughlin (2016); Mulligan (2016); Nishimura, Waryszak, & King (2006, 2007);
Pan & Ryan (2007); Pettinger (2008); Philips (2011); Richterich (2011); Rubiés &
Bacon (2000); Santos (2006); Scarfuto (2013); Westover (2012); Wilson,
Holdsworth, & Witsel (2009); Wong & Liu (2011); Yu & Xu (2016)
Beeton (2010); Beeton (2011); Buchmann, Moore, & Fisher (2010); Busby & Klug
Film-Induced
(2001); Busby, Brunt, & Lund (2003); Carl, Kindon, & Smith (2007); Cosma, Pop,
6. Literary 24
& Negrusa (2007); Croy (2010); Frost (2006); Frost & Laing (2014); Gibson (2006);
Tourism
Lee (2012); Light (2007); Martin-Jones (2014); Muresan & Smith (1998); O’Connor
11
& Bolan (2008); O’Connor & Kim (2014); O’Neill, Butts, & Busby (2005); Peaslee
(2011); Reijnders (2010); Reijnders (2011); Ryan, Yanning, Huimin, & Song (2009);
Tzanelli (2004); Waysdorf & Reijnders (2016)
Literary Cassell (2016); Driscoll (2015); Johanson & Freeman (2012); Robertson & Yeoman
7. 7
Festivals (2014); Rossetti (2016); Stewart (2010); Weber (2015)
Bookshop
8. 2 Driscoll (2016); Seaton (1999)
Tourism
The third type of literary tourism is the most prolific category of literary tourism types. 51 studies were
conducted in this group in which the destinations addressing literary figures were chosen as research
areas. This represents 38.63% of all publications. The studies of this category are divided into three sub-
types. In the first group, studies dealt with the strategies, policies and plans of the literary tourism
destination authorities related to literary products or evaluated to their marketing, promotion, image
and branding efforts and made suggestions (Alghureiby, 2015; Beeton, 2010; Bhandari, 2008; Busby,
Brunt, & Lund, 2003; Chiang, 2004; Cohen-Hattab & Kerber, 2004; Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa, 2007; Croy,
2010; Frost, 2006; Frost & Laing, 2014; Light, 2007; Muresan & Smith, 1998; Müller, 2006; Nixon, 2014;
O’Connor & Bolan, 2008; Ridanpää, 2011; Wallace, 2009; Watkins & Herbert, 2003; Watson, 2013). In the
second group, research was conducted in potential literary destinations that literary tourism has not
come to the forefront yet about the development of literary tourism products or literary trails (Beigi,
Ramesht, & Azani, 2015; Bidaki & Hosseini, 2014; Carson, Hawkes, Gislason, & Martin, 2013; Carson,
Hawkes, Gislason, & Cantrell, 2016; Erkoçi, 2016; Fox, 2008; Jia, 2009; MacLeod, Hayes, & Slater, 2009;
Petroman, Csaholczi, Negrut, Marin, & Petroman, 2016; Stiebel, 2004; Stiebel, 2007; Stiebel, 2010; Topler,
2016; Yiannakis & Davies, 2012). Studies in the third group investigated experiences of literary tourists
in related with literary attractions, literary tours and other products destinations offer (Earl, 2008;
Gothie, 2016; Jiang & Xu, 2016a, 2016b; Lee, 2012; Peaslee, 2011; Plate, 2006; Spooner, 2014; Stiebel, 2013;
van Es & Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b; Waysdorf & Reijnders, 2016; Yu & Xu, 2016).
34 studies were conducted in the ‘travel writing’ type of literary tourism; they account for 25.75% of all
publications. In this category, many of the papers were based on the fact that guidebooks or travel books
are essential means of representing destinations and these are influential in tourist behaviour
(Bhattacharyya, 1997; Cohen-Hattab & Kerber, 2004; Dunn, 2006; Gilbert, 1999; Johnson, 2004; Johnson,
2010; McClinchey, 2015; McGregor, 2000; McLaughin, 2016; Philips, 2011; Yu & Xu, 2016). On the other
hand, guidebook use by tourists was also investigated by some of the papers (Nishimura, Waryszak, &
King, 2006, 2007; Wong & Liu, 2011). The remaining studies focused on travel writings at specific periods
to better understand some concepts or phenomena in that period (Dym, 2004; Jortner, 2013; Kilbride,
2011; McCracken-Flesher, 2016; Scarfuto, 2013; Westover, 2012). Besides these, gender differences in
travel writing is also an important research topic (Caesar, 1999; Johnson, 2010; Mulligan, 2016; Pan &
Ryan, 2007; Wilson, Holdsworth, & Witsel, 2009).
24 papers were published in the category of film-induced literary tourism type. These papers made up
18.18% of all publications. Among the literature adaptations, the movies which are the most research
topics are; Lord of the Rings trilogy (Buchmann, Moore, & Fisher, 2010; Carl, Kindon, & Smith, 2007;
Croy, 2010; Peaslee, 2011; Tzanelli, 2004), Dracula movie series (Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa, 2007; Light,
2007; Muresan & Smith, 1998; Reijnders, 2011), Captain Corelli’s Mandolin (Busby & O’Neill, 2006;
O’Neill, Butts, & Busby, 2005) and Harry Potter movie series (Lee, 2012; Waysdorf & Reijnders, 2016). A
limited number of studies conducted research in the fourth type (7.57%, N = 10), seventh type (5.30%,
N = 7) and eighth type (1.51%, N = 2) of literary tourism.
Literary tourism themes
12
Though this section does not present a quantitative expression, it informs about the themes and
concepts that are subject to many literary tourism studies. As a result of analysis of literary tourism
studies, the most frequently used themes were revealed as authenticity, motivations and experiences of
literary tourists, management issues, marketing issues, interpretation, literary trails and literary tours,
commodification, literary pilgrimage and literary awareness. Table 5 presents data about literary
tourism types.
Table 5. Literary tourism themes

Literary Tourism Sub-subject Related to Theme Relevant Papers
Themes
A number of literary tourism studies
addressed the issue of authenticity by
evaluating literary places regarding
authenticity. These studies are particularly
relevant to the first category of Butler’s Bhandari, 2008; Booth, 2008; Brown 2016a;
literary tourism classification which Fawcett & Cormack, 2001; Gentile & Brown,
includes actual places associated with an 2015; Hazard, 2016; Herbert, 2001; Jia, 2009;
author. The objective authenticity is the Petroman, Petroman, & Brătulescu, 2008;
research topic. The objects exhibited in Ridanpää, 2011; Santesso, 2004; Stiebel,
author-related houses serving as a museum 2013; Wallace, 2009; Watson, 2013; Young,
were examined whether they were indeed 2015
the objects used by the authors and the
effect of authenticity degree of these
Authenticity objects to literary tourists’ experiences
were investigated.
Many papers focused upon the Cohen-Hattab & Kerber, 2004; Delyser,
characteristics of destinations in fictional 2003; Fairer-Wessels, 2010; Johnson, 2010;
or non-fictional texts in the context of Kilbride, 2011; Lerena, 2015; McGregor,
authenticity and tried to explore the effect 2000; Mulligan, 2016; Plate, 2006;
of these texts to travel decisions, Ridanpää, 2011; Ryan, Yanning, Huimin, &
experience quality or satisfaction levels of Song, 2009; Spooner, 2014; van Es &
literary tourists. Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b
A number of papers focused on the
Buchmann, Moore, & Fisher, 2010; Busby &
authenticity issue in terms of destinations
O’Neill, 2006; Frost, 2006; O’Neill, Butts, &
which are popular through a movie and
Busby, 2005; Peaslee, 2011; Reijnders, 2011;
included in the film-induced literary
Tzanelli, 2004; Waysdorf & Reijnders, 2016
tourism categorization.
Some of the studies analysed the
motivations and experiences of literary
Amoamo, 2013; Busby & Devereux, 2015;
tourists visiting an actual literary site or
Busby & Shetliffe, 2013; Carson, Hawkes,
travelling to a literary tourism destination.
Gislason, & Cantrell, 2016; Driscoll, 2016;
These studies represent the first and third
Erkoçi, 2016; Fairer-Wessels, 2010; Herbert,
categories of Butler’s classification. These
2001; Jia, 2009; Jiang & Xu, 2016a; Lee &
Motivations and sites and destinations are attractive for
Weaver, 2014; McClinchey, 2015; Ryan,
Experiences of tourists because of their connection with
Yanning, Huimin, & Song, 2009; Wallace,
Literary Tourists authors, literary figures or fictional
2009; Watson, 2013; Young, 2015; Yu & Xu,
characters, the authentic objects they
2016
contain, and the emotional connections
are established.
Beeton, 2010; Buchmann, Moore, & Fisher,
In many of the papers published of film-
2010; Busby & Klug, 2001; Busby & O’Neill,
induced literary tourism type, the
2006; Carl, Kindon, & Smith, 2007; Croy,
13
experiences of tourists visiting film 2010; Frost, 2006; Lee, 2012; Martin-Jones,
locations are the topic of the research. 2014; Muresan & Smith, 1998; O’Connor &
Bolan, 2008; Peaslee, 2011; Reijnders, 2010;
Reijnders, 2011; Waysdorf & Reijnders, 2016
In a number of papers, the researchers Booth, 2008; Brown, 2016a, 2016b; Earl,
conducted their research as part of the 2008; Gentile & Brown, 2015; Tolic,
experience with a literary pilgrim point of Petroman, Petroman, & Bălan, 2009; Plate,
view. In most of these studies, the 2006; Robertson & Radford, 2009; Spooner,
autoethnographic approach was preferred. 2014, van Es & Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b
Some of the papers addressed management
issues as spatially. These studies mostly
Fawcett & Cormack, 2001; Fox, 2008;
discussed the strategies, decisions and
Hartmann, 2013; Herbert, 2001; Jia, 2009;
choices about the management of the
Jiang & Xu, 2016b; Santesso, 2004; Smith,
literary place and the responsibilities and
2003; Topler, 2016; Young, 2015
characteristics of the managers in the
management process.
The papers addressing the sustainable Bidaki & Hosseini, 2014; Chiang, 2004;
Management
development of touristic destinations Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa, 2007; Delyser,
Issues
generally focused on the role of literary 2003; Driscoll, 2016; Lee & Weaver, 2014;
figures in the destination in this Light, 2007; Marques & Cunha, 2013;
development and investigated issues such Müller, 2006; Ridanpää, 2011; Seaton, 1999;
as planning, policymaking, strategies, Watkins & Herbert, 2003; Yiannakis &
partnerships on the destination basis. Davies, 2012
Few studies addressed the issue of event
Cassell, 2016; Robertson & Yeoman, 2014;
management within the scope of literary
Rossetti, 2016; Stewart, 2010
festivals.
Alghureiby, 2015; Beeton, 2010; Bhandari,
2008; Bidaki & Hosseini, 2014; Busby &
Klug, 2001; Busby & O’Neill, 2006; Busby,
Brunt, & Lund, 2003; Busby, Korstanje, &
Mansfield, 2011; Carson, Hawkes, Gislason,
The majority of the studies are related to
& Cantrell, 2016; Cohen-Hattab & Kerber,
destination marketing. Amongst these
2004; Cosma, Pop, & Negrusa, 2007; Croy,
papers, according to the third category of
2010; Driscoll, 2016; Erkoçi, 2016; Frost,
Butler’s classification, some of the papers
2006; Frost & Laing, 2014; Gothie, 2016;
are about marketing destinations through
Hoppen, Brown, & Fyall, 2014; Light, 2007;
literary figures whilst the remaining papers
MacLeod, Hayes, & Slater, 2009; Marques
Marketing Issues are related to issues such as destination
& Cunha, 2013; Martin-Jones, 2014; Nixon,
image, destination branding, cultural
2014; O’Connor & Bolan, 2008; O’Connor &
identity.
Kim, 2014; O’Neill, Butts, & Busby, 2005;
Petroman, Csaholczi, Negrut, Marin, &
Petroman, 2016; Tzanelli, 2004; Wallace,
2009; Watkins & Herbert, 2003; Watson,
2013; Yu & Xu, 2016
The papers on literary place marketing
Fawcett & Cormack, 2001; Hartmann, 2013;
addressed issues such as marketing
Jiang & Xu, 2016b; Muresan & Smith, 1998;
strategies of the places, place promotion
Topler, 2016
and promotional tools.
Ashworth & Ashworth, 1998; Booth, 2008;
The majority of interpretation strategies
Fawcett & Cormack, 2001; Fox, 2008;
research is based on evaluating these
Gothie, 2016; Hartmann, 2013; Herbert,
Interpretation strategies in terms of site management or
2001; Jia, 2009; Marques & Cunha, 2013;
investigating how these interpretation
Muresan & Smith, 1998; Petroman,
14
decisions affect the literary tourists’ Petroman, & Brătulescu, 2008; Santesso,
experiences. 2004; Scarfuto, 2013; Tekgül, 2016; Wallace,
2009; Waysdorf & Reijnders, 2016; Young,
2015; Yu & Xu, 2016
Carson, Hawkes, Gislason, & Martin, 2013;
Carson, Hawkes, Gislason, & Cantrell, 2016;
In a number of literary tourism studies, the
Erkoçi, 2016; MacLeod, Hayes, & Slater,
researchers conducted research on literary
2009; Nixon, 2014; Petroman, Csaholczi,
trails developed or intended to be
Negrut, Marin, & Petroman, 2016; Scarfuto,
developed in literary tourism destinations.
2013; Stiebel, 2007; Stiebel, 2010; Stiebel,
Literary Trails & 2013; Topler, 2016
Literary Tours Beeton, 2010; Buchmann, Moore, & Fisher,
2010; Carl, Kindon, & Smith, 2007; Earl,
Some of the studies chose guided literary 2008; Fairer-Wessels, 2010; Lee, 2012; Light,
tours organized in literary tourism 2007; Muresan & Smith, 1998; O’Connor &
destinations as a research topic. Kim, 2014; Peaslee, 2011; Plate, 2006;
Reijnders, 2011; Ridanpää, 2011; Spooner,
2014; van Es & Reijnders, 2016a, 2016b
Although in fact the majority of literary Amoamo, 2013; Bhandari, 2008; Delyser,
tourism studies indirectly involve the topic 2003; Fox, 2008; Gothie, 2016; Kilbride,
Commodification of commodification, only a few studies 2011; Marques & Cunha, 2013; Plate, 2006;
focused primarily on the commodification Reijnders, 2010; Ridanpää, 2011; Stiebel,
processes. 2004; Watson, 2013
Booth, 2008; Brown, 2016a, 2016b; Busby &
Shetliffe, 2013; Delyser, 2003; Donaldson,
In many of the literary tourism studies, Gregory, & Murrieta-Flores, 2015; Fawcett
‘literary pilgrim’ term was used for tourists & Cormack, 2001; Fox, 2008; Gothie, 2016;
who travel to find the traces of the authors Herbert, 2001; Jia, 2009; Marques & Cunha,
they admire and who have a motivation to 2013; Perkin, 2008; Philips, 2011; Petroman,
Literary
visit the places where the authors live or Csaholczi, Negrut, Marin, & Petroman,
Pilgrimage
work, to see the objects the authors used or 2016; Reijnders, 2010; Ridanpää, 2011;
to take a trip to the landscapes or settings Robertson & Radford, 2009; Robinson,
in the writings of the authors for reliving 2002; Smith, 2003; Spooner, 2014; Stiebel,
them. 2007; Stiebel, 2013; van Es & Reijnders,
2016b; Wallace, 2009; Westover, 2009;
Young, 2015; Zemgulys, 2000
Busby & Devereux, 2015; Busby & Shetliffe,
A number of studies were conducted on 2013; Carson, Hawkes, Gislason, & Martin,
prior knowledge of literary tourists 2013; Fairer-Wessels, 2010; Gothie, 2016;
Literary Awareness
concerning the authors and their literary Herbert, 2001; Muresan & Smith, 1998;
works. Ryan, Yanning, Huimin, & Song, 2009;
Smith, 2003; van Es & Reijnders, 2016b
Discussion
This paper has found five critical points by reviewing 132 literary tourism articles published over the 20-
year period, 1997-2016. First, the analysis of the published papers on literary tourism demonstrates that
69 of all publications were published in the journals in the field of tourism. This is evidence that literary
tourism which remains behind in many parts of the world, has gained importance in tourism studies as
a field of research. In addition to this, the publication of many articles in the literature field or other
social sciences fields shows that literary tourism is a research field interacting with other disciplines.
Considering the research conducted on literary tourism, which is associated with many types of tourism
including culture as a niche tourism type, it has been revealed that literary tourism is related to tourism
15
types such as cultural tourism, heritage tourism, dark tourism, event tourism, film tourism, rural
tourism and urban tourism.
The second remarkable point is that the majority of literary tourism papers (86,29%) are qualitative. In
addition to this, the case study design was the most commonly used qualitative research design. This
indicates that the results of literary tourism research cannot be generalised and the results can change
according to the destinations’ literary figures or different characteristics of literary places. It is
noteworthy that this difference is more pronounced in the studies of which literary tourists are the
research topic. This is an opportunity for researchers to conduct research on visitor experiences in terms
of various variables and to do comparative analyses of literary sites and literary figures in different
regions. Thanks to this characteristic of literary tourism, it is possible to conduct different studies for
every literary figure or every literary place. Because literary tourism initiatives, whether spatial or
destination basis, will be shaped according to the literary figures, the decisions taken are unique to the
place or the destination. This leads to the fact that the research results are destination-specific or place-
specific.
The third critical finding of the study is that the number of publications on literary tourism in other
regions except the UK is limited. This can be explained by the insufficient potential for literary tourism,
in other words by the lack of supply sources of literary tourism or by existing potential could not be
brought in the tourism sector. In many parts of Europe, especially in the UK, literary tourism has
developed as a tourism type, and the potential of literary tourism product is quite a few. There is
correspondingly more research from Europe on literary tourism. This has also been pointed out in
research conducted from regions that literary tourism remains behind as a tourism type. The studies
conducted in these regions mostly focused on the possible contributions of literary tourism to the
destinations through the development of the existing potential.
This indicates the crucial fourth point of this study that the third category of Butler’s classification,
‘appeal of areas because they were appealing to literary and other figures’, is the most researched literary
tourism type. This verifies that literary tourism has a potential for development in many parts of the
world. Apart from this category, many studies were also conducted in the other seven types of literary
tourism at different rates. Studies that are directed to different types such as fictional places or
characters, actual places, travel writing, film-induced literary tourism or literary festivals prove that
literary tourism is a wide-range research field. The categories with the least number of studies are
literary festivals and bookshop tourism types. The literary festivals that prove the relation of literary
tourism and event tourism have significant potential as a tourism attraction component.
Comprehensive research can be carried out on topics such as event management, event marketing,
event and destination branding relationship, or visitor expectations/motivations at local, national or
international literary festivals. Academic research carried out in cooperation with destination
management units may contribute to increasing the share of the destination from tourism. 22 studies
were carried out in the first category, but this figure represents a low rate. This category is essential
because it indicates that literary tourism contributes to the sustainability of cultural heritage. The actual
places associated with authors are part of the cultural heritage. Therefore, preserving these places,
restoring and interpreting them in accordance with the principle of authenticity will both increase the
number of visitors to the destination and contribute to the sustainability of these cultural heritage
values. Therefore, it is important to keep these places alive with the academic studies and the projects
to be conducted in the light of these studies.
The fifth key point of the study is that nine significant themes have been identified from the 132
publications reviewed. These themes are authenticity, motivations and experiences of literary tourists,
16
management issues, marketing issues, interpretation, literary trails & literary tours, commodification,
literary pilgrimage and literary awareness. These themes are interconnected and constitute the nine
keystones of literary tourism together. These themes are essential for both the researchers and the
authorities of literary sites and destinations. As can be seen from Figure 2, literary tourism framework
depicting the results of the literature review, the literary tourist is the key concept of literary tourism.
Motivations of
literary tourists
Literary Literary
Awareness Awareness
Literary Sites (Actual or fictional) Literary Destinations

 Authenticity (A link with the  Authenticity (overlapping the
author or the literary work, the mental image with the destination)
objects of the author etc.)  Destination management issues
 Management issues (Planning,  Commodification of literary figures
strategies, decisions etc.)  Planning literary trails and
 Responsibilities of Managers organizing literary tours in the
 Interpretation forms trails
 Marketing issues (place  Destination marketing
promotion, promotional tools  Destination branding
etc.)
Literary Literary
Awareness Awareness
Experiences of
literary tourists
Figure 2. Literary Tourism Framework
Tourists who visit a literary place or a destination with literary figures have different motivations. The
level of literary awareness plays a decisive role in the motivations of literary tourists. As an integral part
of the idea of literary pilgrimage, literary awareness indicates the literary tourists’ levels of becoming
literary pilgrims. Busby & Shetliffe (2013) argued that the motivations and experiences of visitors vary
across literary sites and appeal to different tourist categories with different level of literary awareness.
The high level of literary awareness affects the quality of literary site experience positively. In addition,
a literary tourist with a high literary awareness has the motivation to establish an emotional connection
with the author in the literary site. Regarding this issue, Gothie (2016, p. 406) stated that ‘Literary
tourists who have previously “visited” a place in the pages of a novel will feel they know something about
the place and the events that unfolded there’.
Other themes revealed from the study also play a decisive role in the ultimate literary tourism
experiences of literary tourists. One of the most emphasised concepts in literary tourism research is
17
authenticity due to an authentic experience is the most sought thing in a literary site by literary tourists.
Authenticity is important both in terms of literary sites and destinations. Literary pilgrims place
particular emphasis on authenticity level in literary sites. In literary sites, literary pilgrims want to see
and touch the real objects that used by the author and want to imagine the scenes about the author
such as while walking around, working, reading or eating in his/her own house. Regarding this issue,
Fawcett and Cormack (2001) found out that not all literary site authorities defined the authentic as the
real or unreproducible. The case studies they examined indicated that site authorities construct
authenticity by setting what they believe is true about the author and the sites the author associated
with. In another study, Santesso (2004) mentioned ‘Stratford Model’ which is about the authenticity of
literary sites. This model provides a less intellectual but more immediate resolution to literary-touristic
discrepancy through manufacturing a false authenticity designed to match both the tourist-readers’
ideal and the argument about the author which the managers wish to present. Therefore, authenticity
is interrelated with the strategies and decisions of literary site developers, planners and managers. These
strategies and decisions are concretised through various interpretation techniques. The interpretation
decisions are made in a literary site, both actual and fictional, determine the quality level of the literary
tourism experience of literary tourists. Marketing strategies are as prominent as interpretation forms in
meeting the expectations of the literary tourists. In conjunction with this issue, Muresan and Smith
(1998) examined the interpretation policies and marketing strategies of Bran Castle, which is connected
to the Dracula character and accordingly they investigated the experiences of tourists visiting Bran
Castle. It was concluded that the tourists who visited the castle for Dracula tourism could not get
information about the Dracula character due to the marketing strategies and interpretation policies and
their expectations were not met because they could not find any elements related to the theme.
Authenticity in literary tourism is a required specification that tourists are seeking not only in terms of
literary sites but also in terms of destinations. Reijnders (2011) concluded that tourists travel with the
motivations of comparing their own mental images with the places in the fictional works. Concerning
this issue, Ridanpää (2011) made a trip to Pajala in Mikael Niemi’s works but in this experience, he stated
that he encountered disparate places than Pajala and places he mentioned. In literary destinations, it is
the responsibility of the destination authorities to transform the literary figures into tourism products
by commodifying them and to plan and develop these products. Because of being a wide range of issues,
destination management is the most prolific topic in literary tourism studies related to management
issues. The successful commodification of literary figure that tourists will have a meaningful experience
is a complicated and challenging process which requires a proper investigation, planning and active
cooperation of the stakeholders in the destination. Fox (2008) focused on the process of transforming
a literary heritage into a consumable product and he asserted that this process consists of four stages:
vision, explication, conversion and benefits. In some destinations, the destination authorities develop
literary trails to enable tourists to have different experiences. In literary trails in order to create a themed
experience for the literary tourists, appealing, relevant, curious, exciting stories and places are selected
and put together. These trails and literary tours organized in these trails can also provide tourists with
quality experiences depending on their level of authenticity. In her study relating to the Jane Austen
tour, Spooner (2014) concluded that both due to the geographical authenticity of the author’s works,
and the objective authenticity in the actual places associated with the author led her to establish a
connection with the author and to gain a deeper perspective on her novels.
Figure 2 shows that all the processes of literary sites and destinations should be managed according to
motivations, needs and expectations of literary tourists. According to the literary awareness levels of
literary tourists, different interpretation decisions should be taken, cooperation should be made with
experts in all processes for true authenticity. It should be kept in mind that all managerial functions
18
and marketing efforts related to the product in both literary sites and destinations will affect the quality
of the ultimate experiences of literary tourists.
Conclusion
This paper has significant implications for both researchers and authorities of literary places and
destinations. Literary tourism studies included in the present paper demonstrate that literary tourism
has a high research potential as an academic field and they also point out that literary tourism provides
numerous benefits to destinations when developed as a special interest tourism type. The findings of
study show in which fields of literary tourism there is insufficient research, in which regions more
research should be carried out, which activities are in the scope of literary tourism and which themes
research focuses on and in this respect it serves as a guide for researchers.
This paper provides a framework for tourism scholars who want to specialise in literary tourism or
researchers seeking to explore the status of literary figures in the issues of destination management,
marketing and branding. Further research could investigate the identified themes by examining the
relationships with each other for different literary tourism products such as actual houses, festivals,
fictional places or literary tours. Especially in regions except for the UK, academic research on
improving literary tourism potential should be a focus and encouraged. This study will contribute to
raising awareness of literary tourism especially in the regions where literary tourism is in the
background and will encourage academic research focusing on the relationship of literature and
tourism. The fact that literary places and literary figures have distinctive features for each region is an
opportunity for researchers and it will be possible to increase the benefits of literary tourism to
destinations through academic research on these literary values.
This paper also provides information for literary tourism authorities. Literary tourism themes present a
reference guide for the authorities of literary places. In addition, the results are also helpful for
destination authorities. Literary tourism studies emphasized that literary tourism is a great source for
destination marketing, image and branding activities, especially economic gains. Destinations can be
wholly differentiated from other destinations by branding strategies that focus on features belonging to
that destination such as their cultural heritage values, and they can gain competitive advantage.
Therefore, the literary figures in the destinations are essential potentials. The role of academic research
conducted on transforming literary figures into tourist attractions through literary tourism is vital.
Academic research on various literary tourism products that can be developed or are in the planning
stages or academic research aimed at maximising the use of existing literary tourism products in the
destination will lead the tourism sector and pave the way for academic-sector cooperation.
References
Alghureiby, T. (2015). Dublin: of the city and its literary legacy. Arab World English Journal, 3, 183-196.
Amoamo, M. (2013). (de)Constructing place-myth: Pitcairn Island and the ‘Bounty’ story. Tourism
Geographies, 15(1), 107-124.
Ashworth, F., & Ashworth, G. (1998). Frank Mccourt’s Limerick: an unwelcome heritage? International
Journal of Heritage Studies, 4(3-4), 135-142.
Baleiro, R., & Quinteiro, S. (2018). Key concepts in literature and tourism studies. Portugal: Universidade
de Lisboa.
Beeton, S. (2010). Landscapes as characters: film, tourism and a sense of place. Metro Magazine: Media
& Education Magazine, 166, 114-118.
Beeton, S. (2011). Tourism and the moving image – ıncidental tourism promotion. Tourism Recreation
Research, 36(1), 49-56.
19
Beigi, H., Ramesht, M. H., & Azani, M. (2015). Literary tourism and place identity of the central plateau
of Iran. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences, 5(6), 399-406.
Bhandari, K. (2008). Touristification of cultural resources: A case study of Robert Burns. TOURISM
Preliminary Communication, 56(3), 283-293.
Bhattacharyya, D. P. (1997). Mediating India: An analysis of a guidebook. Annals of Tourism Research,
24(2), 371-389.
Bidaki, A. Z. & Hosseini, S. H. (2014). Literary tourism as a modern approach for development of tourism
in Tajikistan. J Tourism Hospit, 3(1), 120.
Booth, A. (2008). Revisiting the homes and haunts of Mary Russell Mitford. Nineteenth-Century
Contexts, 30(1), 39-65.
Brown, L. (2016a). Treading in the footsteps of literary heroes: An autoethnography. European Journal
of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, 7(2), 135-145.
Brown, L. (2016b). Tourism and pilgrimage: Paying homage to literary heroes. International Journal of
Tourism Research, 18, 167-175.
Buchmann, A., Moore, K., & Fisher, D. (2010). Experiencing film tourism: Authenticity & fellowship.
Busby, G., & Devereux, H. (2015). Dark tourism in context: The diary of Anne Frank. European Journal
of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, 6(1), 27-38.
Busby, G., & Klug, J. (2001). Movie-induced tourism: The challenge of measurement and other issues.
Journal of Vacation Marketing, 7(4), 316-332.
Busby, G., & Laviolette, P. (2006). Narratives in the net: Fiction and Cornish tourism. In P. Payton (Ed.),
Cornish studies fourteen (pp. 142-163). Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
Busby, G., & O’Neill, K. (2006). Cephallonia and Captain Corelli’s Mandolin: The influence of literature
and film on British visitors. Acta Turistica, 18(1), 30-51.
Busby, G., & Shetliffe, E. (2013). Literary tourism in context: Byron and Newstead Abbey. European
Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, 4(3), 5-45.
Busby, G., Brunt, P., & Lund, J. (2003). In Agatha Christie Country: Resident perception of special
interest tourism. Tourism, 51(3), 287-300.
Busby, G., Korstanje, M. E., & Mansfield, C. (2011). Madrid: Literary fiction and the imaginary urban
destination. Journal of Tourism Consumption and Practice, 3(2), 20-37.
Caesar, T. (1999). Sexual assault and cognitive mapping in women’s travel guidebooks. Women’s Studies,
28(5), 527-545.
Carl, D., Kindon, S., & Smith, K. (2007). Tourists’ experiences of film locations: New Zealand as ‘Middle-
Earth’. Tourism Geographies, 9(1), 49-63.
Carson, S., Hawkes, L., Gislason, K., & Martin, S. (2013). Practices of literary tourism: An Australian case
study. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(1), 42-50.
Carson, S., Hawkes, L., Gislason, K., & Cantrell, K. (2016). Literature, tourism and the city: Writing and
cultural change. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 15(4), 380-392. (Article first published
online: April 4, 2016).
Cassell, G. (2016). Literary festival tourism in Montserrat. Caribbean Quarterly, 62(2), 248-263.
Chiang, C. Y. (2004). Novel tourism: Nature, industry and literature on Monterey’s Cannery Row.
Western Historical Quarterly, 35(3), 309-329.
Cohen-Hattab, K., & Kerber, J. (2004). Literature, cultural identity and the limits of authenticity: A
composite approach. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6, 57-73.
Cooper, D., & Gregory, I. N. (2011). Mapping the English Lake District: A literary GIS. Transactions of
the Institute of British Geographers, 36(1), 89-108.
Cosma, S., Pop, C., & Negrusa, A. (2007). Should Dracula myth be a brand to promote Romania as a
tourist destination? Interdisciplinary Management Research, 3, 39-56.
20
Croy, W. G. (2010). Planning for film tourism: Active destination image management. Tourism and
Hospitality Planning & Development, 7(1), 21-30.
Dann, G. (1999). Writing out the tourist in space and time. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(1), 159-187.
Delyser, D. (2003). Ramona memories: Fiction, tourist practices, and placing the past in Southern
California. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(4), 886-908.
Donaldson, C., Gregory, I. N., & Murrieta-Flores, P. (2015). Mapping ‘Wordsworthshire’: A GIS study of
literary tourism in Victorian Lakeland. Journal of Victorian Culture, 20(3), 287-307.
Driscoll, B. (2015). Sentiment analysis and the literary festival audience. Continuum, 29(6), 861-873.
Driscoll, B. (2016). Local places and cultural distinction: The booktown model. European Journal of
Cultural Studies, 21(4), 401-417. (Article first published online: July 21, 2016).
Dunn, D. (2006). Imagining Alexandria: Sightseeing in a city of the mind. Journal of Tourism and
Cultural Change, 4(2), 96-115.
Dym, J. (2004). More calculated to mislead than inform’: Travel writers and the mapping of Central
America, 1821-1945. Journal of Historical Geography, 30, 340-363.
Earl, B. (2008). Literary tourism: Constructions of value, celebrity and distinction. International Journal
of Cultural Studies, 11(4), 401-417.
Erkoçi, I. (2016). Ismail Kadare as tourist attraction. Dos Algarves: A Multidisciplinary e-Journal, 28, 1-12.
Fairer-Wessels, F. A. (2010). Young adult readers as potential consumers of literary tourism sites: A
survey of the readers of two of the Dalene Matthee forest novels. Mousaion, 28(2), 134-151.
Fawcett, C., & Cormack, P. (2001). Guarding authenticity at literary tourism sites. Annals of Tourism
Research, 28(3), 686-704.
Fox, R. (2008). Marin Držić: A case for Croatian literary tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 3(2), 138-
153.
Frost, W. (2006). Braveheart-ed Ned Kelly: Historic films, heritage tourism and destination image.
Tourism Management, 27, 247-254.
Frost, W., & Laing, J. (2014). Fictional media and imagining escape to rural villages. Tourism
Geographies, 16(2), 207-220.
Gentile, R., & Brown, L. (2015). A life as a work of art: Literary tourists’ motivations and experiences at
Il Vittoriale Degli Italiani. European Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, 6(2), 25-47.
Gibson, S. (2006). A seat with a view: Tourism, (im)mobility and the cinematic-travel glance. Tourist
Studies, 6(2), 157-178.
Gilbert, D. (1999). ‘London in all its glory - or how to enjoy London’: Guidebook representations of
imperial London. Journal of Historical Geography, 25(3), 279-297.
Gothie, S. C. (2016). Playing ‘Anne’: Red braids, green gables, and literary tourists on Prince Edward
Island. Tourist Studies, 16(4), 405-421.
Hartmann, R. (2013). The Anne Frank House in Amsterdam: A museum and literary landscape goes
virtual reality. Journalism and Mass Communication, 3(10), 625-644.
Hazard, E. (2016). The attraction of the American author’s house: Architecture, guidebooks, and display,
1853-1904. Art History, 39(5), 896-925.
Herbert, D. (2001). Literary places, tourism and the heritage experience. Annals of Tourism Research,
28(2), 312-333.
Hoppen, A., Brown, L., & Fyall, A. (2014). Literary tourism: Opportunities and challenges for the
marketing and branding of destinations? Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 3, 37-47.
Jenkins, J. (2011). Out of place: Geographical fiction(s) in Håkan Nesser’s inspector Van Veeteren series.
The Cartographic Journal, 48(4), 285-292.
Jia, H. (2009). The construction of literary tourism site. Tourism, 57(1), 69-83.
Jiang, L., & Xu, H. (2016a). Reading, tourism, and geography consumption in literary places. Tourism
Geographies, 18(5), 483-502.
21
Jiang, L., & Xu, H. (2016b). The growth of literary places in ancient town tourism destinations: Based on
the theories of Bourdieu, Danto and Dickie. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 15(3), 213-228.
(Article first published online: February 18, 2016).
Johanson, K., & Freeman, R. (2012). The reader as audience: The appeal of the writers’ festival to the
contemporary audience. Continuum, 26(2), 303-314.
Johnson, N. C. (2004). Fictional journeys: Paper landscapes, tourist trails and Dublin’s literary texts.
Social & Cultural Geography, 5(1), 91-107.
Johnson, P. C. (2010). Writing liminal landscapes: The cosmopolitical gaze. Tourism Geographies, 12(4),
505-524.
Jortner, M. (2013). Nineteenth-century travel accounts of America and Bayle Bernard’s ‘The Yankee
Pedlar’. Nineteenth Century Theatre and Film, 40(1), 74-97.
Kilbride, D. (2011). Travel writing as evidence with special attention to nineteenth-century Anglo-
America. History Compass, 9(4), 339-350.
Lee, C. (2012). ‘Have magic, will travel’: Tourism and Harry Potter’s United (magical) Kingdom. Tourist
Studies, 12(1), 52-69.
Lee, Y., & Weaver, D. (2014). The tourism area life cycle in Kim Yujeong Literary Village, Korea. Asia
Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 19(2), 181-198.
Lerena, M. J. H. (2015). Tourist or native? Consequences of tourism on the literary, filmic, and critical
practices of Newfoundland. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 13(1), 22-38.
Light, D. (2007). Dracula tourism in Romania: Cultural identity and the state. Annals of Tourism
Research, 34(3), 746-765.
MacLeod, N., Hayes, D., & Slater, A. (2009). Reading the landscape: The development of a typology of
literary trails that incorporate an experiential design perspective. Journal of Hospitality Marketing &
Management, 18(2-3), 154-172.
Marques, L., & Cunha, C. (2013). Literary rural tourism entrepreneurship: Case study evidence from
Northern Portugal. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 5(3), 289-303.
Martin-Jones, D. (2014). Film tourism as heritage tourism: Scotland, diaspora and The Da Vinci Code
(2006). New Review of Film and Television Studies, 12(2), 156-177.
McClinchey, K. A. (2015). Travel books, place experience and the ‘Je Ne Sais Quoi’ of Paris. Tourism
Geographies, 17(5), 701-718.
McCracken-Flesher, C. (2016). Better than to arrive: The last voyage of Walter Scott, Romantic.
European Romantic Review, 27(4), 475-487.
McGregor, A. (2000). Dynamic texts and tourist gaze. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(1), 27-50.
McLaughlin, D. (2016). The game’s afoot: Walking as practice in Sherlockian literary geographies.
Literary Geographies, 2(2), 144-163.
Mulligan, M. (2016). Women’s travel writing and the legacy of romanticism. Journal of Tourism and
Cultural Change, 14(4), 323-338.
Muresan, A., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Dracula’s castle in Transylvania: Conflicting heritage marketing
strategies. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 4(2), 73-85.
Murray- Román, J. (2009). Literary tourism, littérature monde, and the ethics of conversation in Ernest
Pépin’s L’Envers du Décor. International Journal of Francophone Studies, 12(2&3), 289-304.
Müller, D. K. (2006). Unplanned development of literary tourism in two municipalities in rural Sweden.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 6(3), 214-228.
Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (7th ed.).
Essex: Pearson.
Nishimura, S., Waryszak, R., & King, B. (2006). Guidebook use by Japanese tourists: A qualitative study
of Australia inbound travellers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 8(1), 13-26.
22
Nishimura, S., Waryszak, R., & King, B. (2007). The use of guidebooks by Japanese overseas tourists: A
Quantitative Approach. Journal of Travel Research, 45, 275-284.
Nixon, L. (2014). Marginalized memories: Carmen Sylva in Llandudno. International Journal of Regional
and Local History, 9(2), 94-106.
O’Connor, N., & Bolan, P. (2008). Creating a sustainable brand for Northern Ireland through film-
induced tourism. Tourism, Culture & Communication, 8(3), 147-158.
O’Connor, N., & Kim, S. (2014). Pictures and prose: Exploring the impact of literary and film tourism.
Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 12(1), 1-17.
O’Neill, K., Butts, S., & Busby, G. (2005). The Corellification of Cephallonian tourism. Anatolia, 16(2),
207-226.
Pan, S., & Ryan, C. (2007). Gender, framing, and travelogues. Journal of Travel Research, 45, 464-474.
Peaslee, R. M. (2011). One ring, many circles: The Hobbiton tour experience and a spatial approach to
media power. Tourist Studies, 11(1), 37-53.
Perkin, J. R. (2008). The pilgrimages of David Lodge. Christianity and Literature, 57(3), 419-442.
Petroman, I., Petroman, C., & Brătulescu, M. (2008). Virtual tourism: Balzac’s house in Paris (France).
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 40(3), 303-306.
Petroman, I., Csaholczi, A., Negrut, L., Marin, D., & Petroman, C. (2016). Opportunities for literary
tourism practicing in Timis County, Romania. Lucrări Ştiinţifice, 18(1), 279-284.
Pettinger, A. (2008). Caviar and toast. Food, Culture & Society, 11(2), 133-148.
Philips, D. (2011). Mapping literary Britain: Tourist guides to literary landscapes 1951-2007. Tourist
Studies, 11(1), 21-35.
Plate, L. (2006). Walking in Virginia Woolf’s footsteps: Performing cultural memory. European Journal
of Cultural Studies, 9(1), 101-120.
Reijnders, S. (2010). On the trail of 007: Media pilgrimages into the world of James Bond. Area, 42(3),
369-377.
Reijnders, S. (2011). Stalking the Count: Dracula, fandom and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1),
231-248.
Richterich, A. (2011). Cartographies of digital fiction: Amateurs mapping a new literary realism. The
Cartographic Journal, 48(4), 237-249.
Ridanpää, J. (2011). Pajala as a literary place: In the readings and footsteps of Mikael Niemi. Journal of
Robertson, J. P., & Radford, L. A. (2009). The private uses of quiet grandeur: A mediation on literary
pilgrimage. Changing English, 16(2), 203-209.
Robertson, M., & Yeoman, I. (2014). Signals and signposts of the future: Literary festival consumption
in 2050. Tourism Recreation Research, 39(3), 321-342.
Robinson, M. (2002). Reading between the lines: Literature and the creation of touristic spaces. Current
Writing: Text and Reception in Southern Africa, 14(1), 1-28.
Robinson, M., & Andersen, H. C. (2002). Literature and tourism. New York: Continuum.
Rossetti, G. (2016). Foreign languages education in international literary festival tourism: The case of
Festivaletteratura in Italy. International Journal of Language, Translation and Intercultural
Communication, 4, 68-77.
Rubiés, J. P., & Bacon, F. (2000). Travel writing as a genre: Facts, fictions and the invention of a scientific
discourse in early modern Europe. Journeys, 5(33), 5-35.
Ryan, C., Yanning, Z., Huimin, G., & Song, L. (2009). Tourism, a classic novel, and television: The case
of Cáo Xuegin’s Dream of the Red Mansions and Grand View Gardens, Beijing. Journal of Travel
Research, 48(1), 14-28.
Santesso, A. (2004). The birth of the birthplace: Bread Street and literary tourism before Stratford. ELH,
71(2), 377-403.
23
Santos, C. A. (2006). Cultural politics in contemporary travel writing. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(3),
624-644.
Scarfuto, R. R. (2013). Literary routes: Contributions to natural/cultural heritage tourism. How
landscape transforms literature and tourism. AlmaTourism: Journal of Tourism, Culture and
Territorial Development, 4(8), 1-18.
Seaton, A. V. (1999). Book towns as tourism developments in peripheral areas. International Journal of
Smith, K. A. (2003). Literary enthusiasts as visitors and volunteers. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 5, 83-95.
Spooner, E. (2014). Touring with Jane Austen. Critical Survey, 26(1), 42-58.
Stewart, C. (2010). We call upon the author to explain: Theorising writers’ festivals as sites of
contemporary public culture. Journal of the Association for the Study of Australian Literature [Special
Issue: Common Readers and Cultural Critics], 1-14. Retrieved from
https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/index.php/JASAL/issue/view/751/showToc
Stiebel, L. (2004). Hitting the hot spots: Literary tourism as a research field with particular reference to
KwaZulu-Natal South Africa. Critical Arts: South-North Cultural and Media Studies, 18(2), 31-44.
Stiebel, L. (2007). Going on (literary) pilgrimage. Scrutiny2, 12(1), 93-106.
Stiebel, L. (2010). Last stop ‘Little Gujarat’: Tracking South African Indian writers on the Grey Street
Writers’ trail in Durban. Current Writing: Text and Reception in Southern Africa, 22(1), 1-20.
Stiebel, L. (2013). ‘When in Rome…?’ Literary tourism in Rome from a South African perspective. J Hum
Ecol, 43(1), 93-99.
Squire, S. J. (1996). Literary tourism and sustainable tourism: Promoting ‘Anne of Green Gables’ in
Prince Edward Island. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 4(3), 119-134.
Tekgül, D. (2016). Fact, fiction and value in the Museum of Innocence. European Journal of Cultural
Studies, 19(4), 387-402.
Tolić, S., Petroman, I., Petroman, C., Bălan, I., & Popa, D. (2009). Literary tourism: Eugène Ionesco and
the Theater of the Absurd, Lucrări Ştiinţifice Management Agricol, 11(4).
Topler, J. P. (2016). Literary tourism in Slovenia: The case of the Prežihov Voranc Cottage. Informatol,
49(3-4), 129-137.
Tzanelli, R. (2004). Constructing the ‘cinematic tourist’: The ‘sign industry’ of the Lord of the Rings.
Tourist Studies, 4(1), 21-42.
Ulin, D. (2009). Reforming Wordsworth: William Howitt and the ‘great Republican Conservative’.
European Romantic Review, 20(3), 309-325.
van Es, N., & Reijnders, S. (2016a). Chasing sleuths and unravelling the metropolis analyzing the tourist
experience of Sherlock Holmes’ London, Philip Marlowe’s Los Angeles and Lisbeth Salander’s
Stockholm. Annals of Tourism Research, 57, 113-125.
van Es, N., & Reijnders, S. (2016b). Making sense of capital crime cities: Getting underneath the urban
facade on crime-detective fiction tours. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 21(4), 502-520. (Article
first published online: July 8, 2016).
Wallace, C. (2009). Yeats’s Country and ‘Yeats Country’: Conceptualizing literary spaces. Journal of
Watkins, H., & Herbert, D. (2003). Cultural policy and place promotion: Swansea and Dylan Thomas.
Geoforum, 34, 249-266.
Watson, N. J. (2006). The literary tourist. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Watson, C. (2013). Tourist trap: Re-branding history and the commodification of the South in literary
tourism in Mississippi. Studies in Popular Culture, 36(1), 145-160.
24
Waysdorf, A., & Reijnders, S. (2016). Immersion, authenticity and the theme park as social space:
Experiencing the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 21(2),
173-188. (Article first published online: November 9, 2016).
Weber, M. (2015). Conceptualizing audience experience at the literary festival. Continuum, 29(1), 84-96.
Westover, P. (2009). William Godwin, literary tourism, and the work of necromanticism. Studies in
Romanticism, 48(2), 299-320.
Wilson, E., Holdsworth, L., & Witsel, M. (2009). Gutsy Women? Conflicting discourses in women’s
travel guidebooks. Tourism Recreation Research, 34(1), 3-11.
Wong, C. K. S., & Liu, F. C. G. (2011). A study of pre-trip use of travel guidebooks by leisure travelers.
Yiannakis, J. N., & Davies, A. (2012). Diversifying rural economies through literary tourism: A review of
literary tourism in Western Australia. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 7(1), 33-44.
Young, L. (2015). Literature, museums, and national identity; or, why are there so many writers’ house
museums in Britain? Museum History Journal, 8(2), 229-246.
Yu, X., & Xu, H. (2016). Ancient poetry in contemporary Chinese tourism. Tourism Management, 54,
393-403.
Zemgulys, A. P. (2000). ‘Night and Day is Dead’: Virginia Woolf in London ‘literary and historic’.
Twentieth-Century Literature, 46(1), 56-77.
Coordinating editor: Basak Denizci Guillet
25
Volunteer Tourism:
Motivations of Thai Tourists and Western Tourists
Raweewan Proyrungroj 1*
1
Sol International Hotel Management (SIHOM) Department, Sol International School, Woosong University, 171
Dongdaejeon-ro, Dong-gu, Daejeon, 34606, Korea; Email: miss_raweewan_18@yahoo.com
Abstract
This study examines the motivations of Thai tourists and Western tourists in engaging in a volunteer tourism
vacation in Bangkok, Thailand, and analyses how and why the motivations of each group are similar to or different
from each other. An interpretive paradigm utilising a qualitative methodological approach was employed. The
informants consisted of fourteen Thai tourists and fifteen Western tourists, all of which were selected by convenient
sampling and snowball sampling. The findings revealed that there were some common motivations between these
tourists including: (i) to gain new experiences; (ii) personal development and growth; and (iii) personal interest in
certain volunteer activities. However, it was also found that there were differences in motivations between these
groups, including: (i) to gain inner happiness; (ii) to help others; (iii) to learn/be immersed in local culture in a
deeper way; (iv) to meet new friends; and (v) to visit Bangkok and Thailand. The first motivation was found only
in the group of Thai tourists whereas the rest belonged to only the Western tourists.
Keywords: volunteer tourism, motivations, Thai tourists, Western Tourists
Citation: Proyrungroj, R. (2020). Volunteer Tourism: Motivations of Thai Tourists and Western Tourists. European
Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2408.

RESEARCH PAPER 1
Volunteer Tourism: Motivations of Thai Tourists and Western Tourists
Introduction
Volunteer tourism is a new form of tourism activity that has been experiencing significant growth on a
global scale in recent years. Such growth is evidenced by an increase in the number of volunteer
participants and volunteer tourism placements offered in many parts of the world (Callanan & Thomas,
2005; Harlow & Pomfret, 2007; Kontogeorgopoulos, 2017; McIntosh & Zahra, 2007; Tomazos & Butler,
2009). This type of tourism has been particularly popular among Western people (Ackerberg &
Prapasawudi, 2009; Grimm & Needham, 2012; Otoo & Amuquandoh, 2014; Tomazos & Butler, 2009;
Wearing, 2001). Based on the study of Tourism Research and Marketing (TRAM, 2008), approximately
120,000 travellers from the United States of America and the United Kingdom took at least one
volunteer trip abroad per year. TRAM (2008) notes that this number is based only on tourists who
undertook trips through volunteer organisations; therefore, the number could be much higher than this
estimate because many people also took a volunteer trip independently.
The growth and popularity of volunteer tourism is mainly the result of a combination of many factors,
including a reduction in travel barriers (Wearing & McGehee, 2013); an increase in the demand of
tourists from developed countries seeking to gain more authentic, meaningful tourism experiences
(Issac, 2010; Kontogeorgopoulos, 2017; Wearing & McGehee, 2013); the power of the media that makes
people in these countries aware of the poverty and other problems occurring in developing countries
(Callanan & Thomas, 2005); tourists becoming wary of standardised package, traditional holidays
(Callanan & Thomas, 2005; Richard & Wilson, 2006); and being inspired by the philanthropic works of
celebrities such as Angelina Jolie, Ben Affleck, and Ricky Martin, which have been widely shown in
media coverage (Mostafanezhad, 2014). Apart from these factors, terrorist attacks and natural disasters
occurring in many countries also lead to the growth in such activities (Wearing & McGehee, 2013). Major
examples include the 9/11 incident in 2001, the Indian Ocean Boxing Day tsunami in 2004, and the
Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In addition, the industry report titled ‘Volunteer Travel Insights 2009’
reported that these incidents have made people around the world more aware of holidays that have a
component of volunteering in destinations where such incidents have occurred (Nestora, Yeung, &
Calderon, 2009).
At present, volunteer tourism placements are offered in many parts of the world and take a variety of
forms, including taking a gap year or a career break to do volunteer work (Lyons et al., 2012; Yates &
Youniss, 1998); taking internships involving volunteering (Billig & Root, 2006; Bringle & Hatcher, 2011),
being part of a school or university project; and joining an organised, package holiday arranged by tour
operators. Volunteer tourism placements are generally hosted or organised by a wide variety of
organisations, ranging from schools or universities, NGOs, conservation agencies, religious
organisations, government agencies, and tour operators (Benson & Wearing, 2012; Broad, 2003;
Guttentag, 2009; Raymond & Hall, 2008; Söderman & Snead, 2008). This type of tourism also involves
different types of volunteer work, such as childcare, care for the elderly/disabled people, teaching,
providing community welfare and healthcare services, construction, environmental conservation and
research, wildlife rescue, and immediate rescues after natural disasters (Callanan & Thomas, 2005;
Guttentag, 2009).
The phenomenal growth and popularity of volunteer tourism vacations has led to an increase in the
study of this topic by researchers and scholars, especially from Western countries. However, in
Thailand, the study of volunteer tourism is still relatively limited when compared with the study of
other forms of tourism such as leisure tourism, ecotourism, nature tourism, cultural tourism, and
adventure tourism. In fact, the study of volunteer tourism in Thailand is still in its infancy, although
Thailand has been listed as one of the most popular and visited destinations for volunteer tourism
2
Proyrungroj (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2408
(GoAbroad.com, 2018). Moreover, volunteer tourists have been identified as a group of tourists with the
potential for growth in Thailand, and the promotion of volunteer tourism has been included as one of
the marketing strategies for the European region of the Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT) (Tourism
Authority of Thailand, 2010). This type of tourism is regarded as ‘promising future niche-marketing’ for
Thai tourism (TAT, 2010). For this reason, the researcher believes that more studies on volunteer
tourism in the context of Thailand should be conducted because the findings of these studies could
contribute to the knowledge of this type of tourism, providing an insight on how to develop and
promote volunteer tourism sustainably for responsible government agencies and all related
stakeholders. Moreover, previous studies on volunteer tourists’ motivations have focused mainly on the
motivations of tourists from wealthy developed countries, known collectively as ‘the North’, taking a
volunteer trip in a poor developing country, or ‘the South’, and have paid little attention to tourists
doing such trip in their own country. Moreover, less attention has been given to a comparison study of
motivations of volunteer tourists from different geographical and cultural backgrounds.
Upon realising a gap in the literature on volunteer tourism as identified above, this study, therefore,
aims to examine the motivations of both Thai tourists and Western tourists in participating in volunteer
tourism activities in Thailand. It also examines how and why the motivations of each group are similar
to or different from each other. The concept of push and pull motivational factors, proposed by Dann
(1977, 1981), was used as a framework in this study because it can help the researcher analyse and
understand the significant roles of push and pull factors in influencing the volunteer tourists’
motivations and the relationship between these factors. This concept helps to understand both internal
and external forces that influence the decision of the volunteer tourists. Push factors are useful in
explaining the initial needs and desires of a tourist that lead him/her to make a decision to engage in a
certain type of holiday in the first place while pull factors have been useful for understanding his/her
choice of tourist activities and a destination (Otoo & Amuquandoh, 2014). This concept can make a
significant theoretical contribution to the field of volunteer tourists’ motivations because it enables
understanding of the influences of ‘intangible’ desires of tourists (push factors) and ‘tangible’
characteristics or attributes of tourism activities and a destination (pull factors) on the decision of the
volunteer tourists.
Literature review
Volunteer tourism
Volunteer tourism is now one of the most popular and fastest-growing forms of alternative tourism
(Brown & Morrison, 2003; McIntosh & Zahra, 2007; Raymond & Hall, 2008). It can be characterised as
a combination of tourism or leisure activities and volunteering activities (McGehee & Andereck, 2009;
Raymond & Hall, 2008). Volunteer tourism is arguably a more responsible, sustainable form of tourism.
Unlike leisure tourists who tend to cause problems in the destinations they visit, the acts of the
volunteer tourists are argued to be driven by goodwill or a sense of responsibility, and will potentially
benefit local people at the holiday destinations (Gray & Campbell, 2007; McGehee & Santos, 2005;
Wearing, 2001).
A number of scholars and researchers have attempted to define ‘volunteer tourism’. Examples of widely-
cited definitions include Wearing (2001:1) who states that volunteer tourism refers to
those tourists who, for various reasons, volunteer in an organised way to undertake
holidays that might involve aiding or alleviating the material poverty of some groups in
society, the restoration of certain environments or research into aspects of society or the
environment.
3
Brown (2005: 480) states that volunteer tourism is
a type of tourism experience where a tour operator offers travellers an opportunity to

participate in an optional excursion that has a volunteer component, as well as cultural
exchanges with local people.
These two definitions similarly highlight the practice of volunteer tourists who spend parts of their
holidays volunteering at the destination and such practice potentially benefit the local residents in that
destination, but in Brown’s definition, the dimension of cultural exchanges between the volunteer
tourists and the host community are also emphasised.
According to existing literature (e.g. Broad, 2003; Brown & Morrison, 2003; Lepp, 2009; McGehee &
Santos, 2005; McIntosh & Zahra, 2007; Ooi & Laing, 2010; Raymond & Hall, 2008; Sin, 2009; Wearing,
2001), volunteer tourism can be viewed as a mutually beneficial form of tourism from which both
volunteer participants and local residents in the host communities can benefit equally. The benefits
that the local people can gain from the volunteer participants can be classified into three main areas
including economic-, social-, and environment-related benefits. In terms of economic-related benefits,
volunteer tourism can provide the local residents with unpaid workforce, financial support,
supplementary revenue, local employment, and improved facilities and infrastructure in the
communities (Morgan, 2010). In terms of social-related benefits, volunteer tourism not only provides
funds for the development of the local communities (Callanan & Thomas, 2005; McIntosh and Zahra,
2007; Stoddart & Rogerson, 2004; Wearing, 2001), but it can also provide an educational opportunity for
local people (Sin, 2010). Moreover, this type of tourism can help promote local culture and values
(Wearing, 2001). As for environment-related benefits, volunteer tourists participating in environmental-
related projects can provide time and effort in the restoration and conservation of the environments in
the communities (Broad, 2003; Wearing, 2001).
As for the benefits for the volunteer tourists, many existing studies (e.g. Broad, 2003; Brown, 2005;
Harlow & Pomfret, 2007; Jones, 2005; Lo & Lee, 2011; McIntosh & Zahra, 2007; Proyrungroj, 2017a; Zahra
& McIntosh, 2007; Wearing, 2001) argue that the learning nature of volunteer tourism experiences
facilitates the volunteer tourists to develop their abilities and skills in several ways, such as developing
or enhancing their communication skills, gaining their confidence, enhancing their relationship with
others, and developing problem-solving skills. Furthermore, Harlow & Pomfret (2007) state that
environmental-related volunteer tourism projects provide the volunteer tourists with an opportunity to
directly and actively engage in restoration and conservation activities, which helps increase their
awareness of the significance of environmental resources as well as enhance their knowledge of
environmental issues.
Volunteer tourists
Volunteer tourists can be defined as travellers who look for tourism experiences that provide benefits
for themselves and the host communities they visit equally (Wearing, 2001). Gray & Campbell’s (2007)
study reports that in the view of the volunteer tourists, the local residents, the staff members of
volunteer tourism projects, and other related stakeholders, there are mixed opinions regarding the
volunteer tourists, ranging from considering them as complete tourists or a special type of tourists to
not being tourists at all.
Several studies support Gray & Campbell’s (2007) study. For example, McGehee & Andereck (2009) state
in the opinion of volunteer tourists and local residents, the volunteer tourists do not seem to be similar
4
to other tourists. Similarly, Lyons (2003), van der Meer (2007), and Wearing (2001) also argue that some
volunteer tourists are reluctant to call themselves tourists. Moreover, the study of Lepp (2009) reports
that some volunteer participants require some forms of duties and obligations to differentiate
themselves from leisure tourists.
As one of the main characteristics of the volunteer tourists is ‘volunteering’ or ‘working without pay’,
the question of whether they should be regarded as volunteers or a special type of tourist arises. A
number of scholars and researchers (e.g. Broad, 2003; Brown, 2005; Gray & Campbell, 2007; Jones, 2005;
McGehee & Santos, 2005; Mustonen, 2006; Raymond, 2007; Wearing, 2001; Zahra & McIntosh, 2007)
argue that the volunteer tourists should be regarded as a type of tourist, rather than volunteers.
Raymond (2007) points out that a major distinction between volunteer tourists and conventional
volunteers is that the former involve a tourism component whereas the latter do not involve this
component. In this sense, it can be implied that volunteer tourists are different from conventional
volunteers in that they do not only work, but also engage in tourism or leisure activities. In addition,
Tomazos & Butler (2009) explain the difference between volunteer tourists and conventional volunteers
by stating that volunteer tourists have to pay for transportation, accommodation, and food for their
opportunity to work, just as tourists pay for a holiday whereas conventional volunteers do not.
The motivations of volunteer tourists represent another aspect that can be used to differentiate them
from conventional volunteers. Several researchers (e.g. Brown, 2005; Chen & Chen, 2011; Lo & Lee, 2011;
Sin, 2009; Wearing, 2001) argues that volunteer tourists are generally motivated by a desire to gain
authentic and cross-cultural experiences with local residents in the community they visit, by living,
working, and having close interactions with local people. Such motivation is not usually found among
conventional volunteers.
Tourist motivation
Tourist motivation is a concept that has been largely defined by a number of scholars and researchers.
Examples of such definitions given by well-known scholars in the field of tourist motivation include:
Dann (1981: 205), who states that tourist motivation is “a meaningful state of mind which adequately
disposes an actor or a group of actors to travel, and which is subsequently interpretable by others as a
valid explanation for such a decision.”; and Wearing (2004: 216), who states that “motivation is aroused
when individuals think of certain activities that are potentially satisfying. Since people act to satisfy
their needs, motivation is thought to be the ultimate driving force that governs travel behaviour”.
Based on the review of literature, it is found that all the authors and researchers in this field agree that
tourist motivation is closely connected with a person’s behaviour. It can be regarded as a force that
drives tourists to engage in a particular tourism activity that potentially brings satisfaction to them.
Tourist motivation is often considered synonymous with ‘reasons’ (Clary & Snyder, 1991) or ‘purpose’ of
travelling (Cohen, 1972). Tourist motivation is complex and dynamic in nature (Sharpley, 2003; 2006).
Generally, a tourist is not likely to be motivated to travel by a single motivation, but rather a
combination of several motivations (Page & Connell, 2009; Sharpley, 2003; 2006).
Tourist motivation plays a significant role in tourist behaviour because it represents the initial point of
understanding tourist behaviour (Pearce & Lee, 2005). Several scholars in the tourism field (e.g.
Crompton, 1979; Holden, 2006; Lo & Lee, 2011; Sharpley, 2006) similarly agree that motivation acts as a
powerful driving force behind tourist behaviour. Sharpley (2006:32) argues that tourist motivation can
be regarded as “tourism’s starting gun” (Sharpley, 2006: 32). This statement is supported by Holden
5
(2006: 63), who states that “without the desire and motivation to travel there would be no tourism
system or tourism industry”.
The knowledge of tourist motivation is also important in terms of marketing as it provides valuable
insights for tourism marketers in understanding the real needs and want of the tourists, which, in turn,
help them to develop tourism products and services that can bring maximum satisfaction to tourists.
However, understanding tourist motivation is one of the most complex issues of tourism research
(Sharpley, 2003). According to Sharpley (2006: 31), one of the major challenges in understanding tourist
motivations is that tourists themselves may not be aware of what motivates them to travel, or have
difficulties in explaining their real motivations.
A number of theories and concepts have been used to investigate and explain the complex nature of
tourist motivations. One of the oldest theory used to understand the individuals’ motivations to perform
certain actions is the instinct theory (Holden, 2006). Atkinson, Atkinson, & Hilgard (1983), referring to
the work of McDougall at the beginning of the twentieth century, argue that behaviors of human occur
from ten inherited instincts, including acquisition, construction, curiosity, gregariousness, flight,
reproduction, pugnacity, repulsion, self-abasement, and self-assertion. However, this theory is later
criticised by many psychologists who point out that McDougall’s list of instincts is too short, and by
1924, more than 800 instincts had been added to this list (Gross, 1992). The main limitation of this
theory is that it only assumes that every action of a person is the result of an instinct, which overlooks
differences in individuals.
Another theory that is used to understand people’s motivations is ‘drive-reduction theory’, which
encompasses two major concepts: homeostatic drive and incentive drive (Bernstein, 2011; Holden,
2006). This concept emphasises the significance of maintaining a biological equilibrium and a
psychological equilibrium within the body. This concept remains that homeostatic and psychological
imbalance motivates a person to perform certain actions to restore equilibrium (Holden, 2006).
However, it was criticieed by some psychologists that it overlooks the influence of expectation on
human behaviour. Page & Connell (2009) point out that expectation can act as a strong motivator.
Witt & Wright (1992) propose the ‘expectancy-valence model’ and use it in the context of tourism. This
model suggests that an individual is driven to perform a certain action by some expectations or
perceived outcomes of his/her action. In this sense, expectations are viewed as a justification of such
action. Yu (2008) suggests that the expectancy-valence model can serve as an alternative approach to
explain tourist motivations in the modern world.
Perhaps, one of the most well-known concepts is Dann’s (1977; 1981) notion of push and pull
motivational factors, which is used as a base to investigate the motivations of volunteer tourists in this
study. According to Dann, push factors are internal to individual, and initiate the desire to travel (e.g.
a desire to make new friends; a desire to gain new experiences) whereas pull factors involve the
attributes of specific tourist activities or countries that attract the tourists. This concept emphasises the
significance of push factors as preceding factors, while maintaining that pull factors are the
consequence of push factors. He also points out that individuals generally realise their wish to travel
before choosing a destination. Sharpley (2003) emphasises the need to understand the distinction
between push and pull factors. He explains that push factors are initial needs and wants of a tourist
which drive him/her to take a holiday in the first place. These needs and wants determine the type of
6
holiday. Once the tourist has made a decision to take a particular type of holiday, the pull factors, which
are specific attributes of a destination, determine his/her choice of destinations.
Grimm & Needham (2012) point out that previous studies on volunteer tourists’ motivations have paid
more attention to push factors than pull factors. Moreover, several studies agree that volunteer tourists
are primarily motivated by push factors. For example, Benson & Seibert (2009) found that amongst the
five most significant motivations of German tourists participating in a volunteer tourism vacation in
South Africa (i.e. experiencing something different or new; meeting African people; learning about
another country and culture; living in another country; and broadening one’s mind), four represent
push factors. Similarly, Brown (2005) found that all four primary motivations of the volunteer tourists
(i.e. cultural immersion; making a difference; seeking camaraderie; and fostering family bonding)
represent push factors.
However, Wearing (2004: 217) argues that both push and pull factors represent important motivations
for volunteer tourists by stating that
The internal push motives of discovery, enlightenment and personal growth are important
to volunteer tourists but features of a destination are more than simply pull motives to this
group, for volunteer tourists see physical locations in developing countries as motivations
in themselves
Wearing (2004) also adds that due to the differences of geographical and cultural backgrounds of
volunteer tourists and a destination, pull factors may have more important roles for volunteer tourists
than conventional tourists. In line with this, Grimm & Needham (2012) similarly state that volunteer
tourists are strongly attracted by images of destinations shown in promotional materials.
After assessing strengths and weaknesses of various models and concepts of tourist motivations as
mentioned above, and other related theories (e.g. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory and the
Volunteer Functions Inventory), the researcher considers the concept of push and pull factors, proposed
by Dann (1977; 1981) as a suitable framework for this study. The rationale of adopting this concept is
already discussed in details in the introduction section.
Volunteer tourist motivation

A number of studies (e.g. Agyeiwaah, 2013; Ali & Rahman, 2019; Anthony & Rosenbaum, 2012; Benson &
Seibert, 2009; Grimm & Needham, 2012; Li, Zhang & Cai, 2016; Otoo, 2013; Otoo & Amuquandoh, 2014;
Proyrungroj, 2017a; Wearing, 2001) similarly reported that the motivations of volunteer tourists are
multidimensional, and their motivations encompass both push and pull factors. Examples of push
factors for engaging in a volunteer tourism vacation include ‘to help other people’ (Ali & Rahman, 2019;
Benson & Seibert, 2009; Chen & Chen, 2011; Otoo, 2013; Otoo & Amuquandoh, 2014; Proyrungroj, 2017a;
Proyrungroj, 2017b; Wearing, 2001); ‘to give back to society’ (Brown, 2005; Lo & Lee, 2011; Otoo &
Amuquandoh, 2014); ‘to make a difference’ (Freidus, 2016); ‘to gain new experiences’ (Chen & Chen, 2011;
Galley & Clifton, 2004; Sin, 2009; Proyrungroj, 2017a); ‘to make new friends’ (Brown, 2005; Proyrungroj,
2017a; Wearing, 2001); ‘personal development and growth’ (Chen & Chen, 2011; Galley & Clifton, 2004;
Sin, 2009; Söderman & Snead, 2008); and ‘cultural exchange’ or ‘to learn/be immersed in local culture’
(Agyeiwaah, 2013; Benson & Seibert, 2009; Otoo, 2013; Otoo & Amuquandoh, 2014; Proyrungroj, 2017a;
Proyrungroj, 2017b). It can be seen that the push factors encompass both altruistic and self-interested
motivations. These push motivations are extensively reported in previous studies.
7
On the contrary to push factors, the pull factors of volunteer tourists, including characteristics of a
particular volunteering activity and attributes of a specific country, have been less examined (Grimm &
Needham, 2012; Söderman & Snead, 2008). Based on a review of literature, the volunteer tourists select
their destinations because of factors including their perception of some countries as dangerous,
unfamiliar and/or poor and in need of help; having unique scenery; having specific projects that take
place in certain countries; recommendations from family or friends (Campbell & Smith, 2005; Simpson,
2005; Söderman & Snead, 2008; Wearing, 2004); a desire to learn about other social classes (Ali &
Rahman, 2019); the enticement of a challenge (Ali & Rahman, 2019); and an opportunity to provide
philanthropic assistance to host communities (Otoo & Amuquandoh, 2014). In terms of volunteer
activities, the reasons that the volunteer tourists decide to take part in certain activities or projects
include recommendations from others, the location where the activities or projects take place, the
opportunities available, and the attractiveness of promotional material (Broad, 2003; Caissie &
Halpenny, 2003; Campbell & Smith, 2005; Grimm & Needham, 2012).
The study of volunteer tourist motivations also revolves around the issue of altruistic versus self-interest
motivations, because volunteer tourism involves non-remunerative activities, which participants are
required to provide labour, time and other resources. Self-interest or egoism is a broad term
encompassing many aspects of motivations that involve personal benefits that the volunteer tourists
expect to gain from their engagement in a volunteer tourism vacation whereas altruistic motivations
involve other benefits or the volunteer tourists’ expectations that they will make the lives of others
better.
The questions of whether ‘true altruism’ do really exists in the volunteer tourists or whether the
motivation to help others merely serves one’s own interest is still a debate among researchers in this
field. To answer these question, altruism should be clearly defined. Batson (1991: 6), one of the pioneers
in the study of altruism, defines altruism as “a motivational state with the ultimate goal of increasing
another’s welfare”. Central to this definition is the meaning of ‘the ultimate goal’. Batson (1991: 6) argues
that, “For a goal to be an ultimate goal, it must be an end in itself and not just an intermediate means
for reaching some other goal.” The ultimate goal of altruism is to increase others’ welfare. He added
that sometimes an altruism may lead to an action that benefits both the aid-recipients and the helpers.
In this case, such action is still regarded to be motivated by an altruistic motivation as long as the
ultimate goal is aimed at the others’ welfare.
Batson (2008) also proposes the ‘empathy-altruism’ concept which argues that altruism is evoked by
empathetic concern that a helper feels for an aid-recipient that leads him/her to reduce that concern.
According to this concept, even though an action of helping caused by such empathic concern can bring
benefits to the helper, such as relieving his/her empathetic concern or gaining self-reward, these
benefits are not considered the ultimate goal of such action, but rather the unintended consequences.
For this reason, Batson (2008) argues that true altruism with the ultimate goal of increasing others’
welfare does exist.
Another related, but contrasting, concept of altruism is egoism, which, according to Batson (1991: 7), is
“a motivational state with the ultimate goal of increasing one’s own welfare”. Considering this
definition, self-interested motivation is aimed at the benefits to the helpers. Researchers who advocate
universal egoism (e.g. Dovidio et al., 2006; Duffy, 2001; Munt, 1994) reject the existence of true altruism
by stating that altruistic motivations are in fact self-serving. Dovidio et al. (2006) point out that
although helping obviously benefits the aid-recipients, the main reason that people help others is in
fact for the benefits of themselves. When applying the notion of altruism and egoism in the context of
8
volunteer tourists’ motivations, the questions arising include: whether the actions of volunteer tourists
are driven by pure altruistic motivations or egoistic motivations; or a combination of both.
To date, there is no literature that claims that the actions of volunteer tourists are motivated by pure
altruistic motivations. Mustonen (2007) explains that this is probably because volunteer tourism is
regarded as another type of tourism, from which the volunteer tourists seek to ‘consume’ benefits
arising from its tourism element. Mustonen (2007) also states that volunteer tourism represents the
best example of actions driven by both motivations. He argues that the motivations of volunteer tourists
seem to fluctuate along the continuum of altruism and egoism, and that the border between these two
motivations is blurred. Agreeing with this, Söderman & Snead (2008: 119) propose the term ‘reciprocal
altruistic’ and arguing that volunteer tourists’ motivations are rather ‘reciprocal altruistic’ because
volunteer tourism not only involves the act of doing good for the benefits of others, but also is about
doing good for the benefits of the volunteer tourists themselves.
Based on the literature review, it is noticeable that most of literature on volunteer tourists’ motivations
to date has mainly emphasised on the motivations of volunteer tourists who are citizens of the North
countries taking such vacation in the South countries. On the contrary, a study of the motivations of
people in the South countries volunteering in their own country is overlooked. Moreover, it is also found
that a comparison study on the motivations of volunteer tourists from the North country and those
from the South country has received little attention. Therefore, this study not only provides another
piece of information on the motivations of volunteer tourists from the North countries, but it also
provides an insight on the motivations of those from Thailand which is a South country. In addition, it
also fills a gap in the literature on the issue of how and why motivations of volunteer tourists from the
North and the South countries are similar to or different from each other.
Methodology
This study is underpinned by an interpretive paradigm using qualitative research methods because this
approach enables the study to achieve its primary aim, which is to gain rich, in-depth, and holistic
understanding of the motivations of Thai and Western volunteer tourists participating in a volunteer
tourism vacation in Bangkok, Thailand as well as an insight of how and why the motivations of each
group are similar to or different from each other.
Although a quantitative research approach is often used in the study of tourist behaviour, several
researchers and scholars (e.g., Blichfeldt & Kessler, Henderson & Bedini, 1995; Hollinshead, 1996;
Mehmetoglu & Altinay, 2006; Walle, 2007) argue that this approach is not especially good at providing
an understanding and uncovering the ‘whys’ underlying the complexity and dynamic of tourist
behaviour. Agreeing upon this, this study is informed by a qualitative approach because it does not seek
to identify nor predict a causal relationship. Instead, it involves the investigation of how the volunteer
tourists make sense of, or interpret their motivations. In addition, the researcher believes that the issue
of tourist motivations is complex and dynamic, and cannot be sufficiently conveyed via numerical and
statistical representations. The researcher also believes that the statistical nature of quantitative
research cannot capture multiple realities of the volunteer tourists’ motivations.
Before the main study was conducted, the researcher performed a pilot study for one month to test the
effectiveness of the interview guides, to ensure that they could sufficiently capture the data needed to
answer the research question. The main study was carried out over a period of three months between
February and April 2015. The data were drawn from two groups of volunteer tourists. There are a total
of twenty-nine respondents participating in this study: fourteen were Thai tourists, and the other fifteen
9
Western tourists. All of them were taking a working vacation in Bangkok during the time of conducting
the main study. These informants were selected by purposive sampling and snowball sampling based
on the following criteria: (1) participating in one of the volunteer activities in Bangkok for at least a
week; (2) under taking sightseeing activities in Bangkok or elsewhere in Thailand during the time that
they did the voluntary work; and (3) aged 18 years old or above for ethical reason. The total number of
respondents was determined based on the saturation point of the data or when no new data emerged
during the data collection and analysis.
The Thai respondents were predominantly female (ten out of fourteen people). Their ages ranged from
eighteen to thirty-eight years. In terms of educational and professional backgrounds, respondents
graduating with a university bachelors’ degree appeared to be the norm for the group (nine people).
Five of the respondents were studying at an undergraduate level, four worked for the private companies,
two had their own business, two were teachers at high schools, and another participant was studying
for a master’s degree.
For the group of Western volunteer tourists, the composition was nine females and six males, with ages
ranging from eighteen to forty-four years. The majority were from the UK (ten people). The rest
included three Australian, one French, and one American tourist. The majority (nine out of fifteen)
were recent graduates taking a break before starting their career. The rest consisted of two high school
students, two doctors, one university student and a university lecturer.
Activities performed by the respondents included teaching at schools, taking care of orphan children,
reading books and making tactile books for the blind, and cleaning public areas. Most of the volunteer
tourists in both groups participated in these activities for around 1-2 weeks. They also visited tourist
attractions in Bangkok. Table 1 and 2 show the profile of the respondents.
Table 1. Profile of Thai volunteer tourists

Name Gender Age Education Occupation
L01 Female 20 High school Undergraduate student
L03 Male 36 Bachelor’s degree Private company’s employee
L04 Female 32 Bachelor’s degree High school teacher
L06 Male 37 Bachelor’s degree Business owner
L07 Female 36 Bachelor’s degree Business owner
L09 Female 27 Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree Student
L11 Female 31 Bachelor’s degree High school teacher
L12 Female 38 Bachelor’s degree Private company’s employee
L13 Female 18 High School Undergraduate Student
L14 Female 18 High School Undergraduate Student
Three data collection methods were used to gather the data. The principle method is semi-structured
interviews, and focus group discussions and participant observation were used as supplementary tools
to gain additional data and for the benefit of triangulating the data. With the use of these three methods,
a more complete picture can be obtained. The triangulation strategy allows the “weaknesses in one
method to be compensated for by strengths in another method” (Denscombe, 2007: 134). Another
10
important rationale for using these three methods together was not only to gain the benefit of cross-
checking the similarities in data gained from different methods, but also to identify and explain the
differences in data.
Table 2. Profile of Western volunteer tourists

Name Gender Age Country of Origin Education Occupation
V01 Female 23 UK Bachelor’s degree Recent graduate
V02 Male 18 France Primary school High school student
V04 Female 22 Australia Bachelor’s degree Recent graduate
V05 Male 23 UK Bachelor’s degree Recent graduate
V06 Female 18 UK Primary school High school student
V09 Male 20 USA A-levels Undergraduate student
V10 Male 37 Australia Doctoral degree Doctor
V11 Female 40 Australia Doctoral degree Doctor
V13 Female 44 UK Doctoral degree University lecturer
Although, the same set of questions were used to explore the motivations of both groups of the
respondents, the emphasis on how the respondents of each group give meaning to the context of the
destination for volunteering activities is somewhat different. Specifically, for the group of Thai
respondents who volunteered in their home country, the interviews aimed to explore why they chose
to volunteer in Bangkok, Thailand, instead of doing abroad whereas in the group of Western volunteer
tourists, apart from asking the respondents’ reasons for choosing to volunteer in Bangkok, Thailand,
the interviews aimed to examine the role of the overseas context of the volunteer tourism destination
in motivating or pulling the respondents to volunteer in Thailand.
The questions used to ask the respondents during the in-depth interviews centred around ‘why they
decided to participate in volunteer tourism in Thailand’. The main topics for the investigation include:
‘motivations for volunteering while holiday’; ‘reasons for selecting Bangkok/Thailand as the destination
for the volunteer vacation’; and ‘reasons for selecting to volunteer in a certain activity/project’. All semi-
structured interviews and focus groups were video-recorded upon receiving permission via a consent
form from the respondents. The use of pseudonyms was adopted to ensure all the respondents that
their information would be kept anonymously and confidentially.
The data were analysed using thematic data analysis, which consists of six continuous and interrelated
phases including: (1) become familiar with the data; (2) generating initial codes; (3) creating themes; (4)
reviewing themes; (5) defining and naming themes; and (6) writing the report. The rationale for using
this technique lies in its accessibility and flexibility because it allows the researcher to interpret the
meaning of the data freely without a restriction to follow particular theoretical approaches (Braun &
Clarke, 2006).
11
Findings
Following thematic data analysis, the main themes relating to the volunteer tourists’ motivations were
identified.
The motivations of the Thai volunteer tourists

For the Thai volunteer tourists, four main motivations were: (i) to gain inner happiness; (ii) to gain new
experiences; (iii) personal development and growth; and (iv) personal interest in a certain volunteer
activity. Amongst these four themes, gaining inner happiness was the most dominant motivational
factor whereas a desire to gain new experiences was the least frequently mentioned. When applying
Dann’s (1977; 1981) concept of push and pull factors to explain these motivations, it can be argued that
the first three motivations are push factors because they represent the inner needs of the tourists
whereas the last one is a pull motivation because it involves the attractiveness of the volunteer activities.
These four factors are shown in Figure 1 and discussed below.
To gain inner happiness
To gain new experiences
Thai volunteer tourists'

motivations
Personal development and

growth
Personal interest in a
certain volunteer activity
Figure 1. The Motivations of Thai Volunteer Tourists
(i) To gain inner happiness. This motivation was cited by all Thai respondents as one of their
motivations. The respondents similarly stated that participating in volunteer activities during their free
time could help reduce their selfishness and it was morally right to do good thing for other people and
the society. Such activities could produce inner happiness for themselves at no cost. Examples of
expressions used by the respondents included: “to gain real and long lasting happiness because we have
done good things” (T5); “to help out other people makes me gain inner happiness which I can’t get from
other activities” (T7); and “I think it is a kind of merit that I can gain from helping these people” (T8).
Moreover, the respondents also expressed their belief that doing volunteer work is a way to perform
good deeds. Some respondents also quoted the Buddha’s teaching that ‘if you do good things, good
things will happen to you’ to explain their motivation. According to the respondents, the satisfaction
derived from doing ‘good deeds’ is long-lasting, unlike the happiness they gain from leisure activities,
which they regarded as temporary.
12
(ii) To gain new experiences. For many Thai respondents, this was the first time they had done
volunteer work and they did this because they wanted to have new experiences. For example, T3 stated
that for him, this volunteering experience had been an experiment so that he would know how he felt
about volunteer work:
I am only doing it because I want to have an experience of volunteering. Besides, I want to

know how I like it. If I didn’t like it, I will just not do it again. But if I like it, I will continue.
It’s just like a ‘taster’ for me.
Some respondents said that they decided to do volunteer work during their free time because they
wanted to gain an experience of being out of their comfort zone.
(iii) Personal development and growth. For some Thai respondents, voluntary work was a chance to
prove themselves that they could do something on their own. For example, T9 explained that she was
shy and never went anywhere alone without family members or friends. She stated that she wanted to
prove herself that she could make a tactile book for the blinds and work in an unfamiliar place with
people she didn’t know.
Additionally, for some respondents, volunteer experiences could serve them as a key addition to their
CV because they could demonstrate skills and qualities to prospective employers, such as being patient,
flexible and adaptable, being confident and responsible, willing to try new things, having problem-
solving skills, maturity, etc., as exemplified by T6:
It does look good to employers if you have mentioned on your CV, “I have done volunteer
work before”, and they can see that you’re a responsible person who cares [for] others.
Moreover, some respondents mentioned that doing voluntary work helped cultivate a good ‘image’ of
themselves because such activities involved doing good things for other people, thus distinguishing
them from others, particularly as doing voluntary work is not common among Thai people.
(iv) Personal interest in a certain volunteer activity. This motivation is considered to be a pull factor
because it involves the attributes or attractiveness of the volunteer activities that ‘pull’ the respondents
to participate. Many Thai respondents stated that one of the main reasons for doing voluntary work is
that they had a personal interest in certain activities, or particular skills or expertise. For example, T5
stated that the reason he decided to participate in the reading for the blind project was that he was
short-sighted and afraid that he might become blind in the future. He added that he felt pity for blind
people and hoped that this work would help prevent his blindness, both in this life and the next. T3 said
that he chose to do voluntary work at the orphanage because he was an only child and always wanted
to have younger brothers or sisters.
From the analysis of the data, it was found that this motivation was one of the main motivations found
among the Thai respondents, as it was mentioned by every respondent. Many respondents stated that
they would only do an activity that they really wanted to do. Some said that although they always
wanted to do voluntary work, this did not mean ‘any’ activities, but rather an activity of the interest.
This study finds that the type of volunteer activities on offer are very important for the volunteer
tourists’ decision-making.
13
The motivations of Western Volunteer tourists

Among the Western volunteer tourists, seven motivational themes were found. These included: (i)
personal development and growth; (ii) to help others; (iii) to gain new experiences; (iv) to learn/be
immersed in the local culture in a deeper way; (v) to meet new friends; (vi) personal interest in a certain
volunteer activity; and (vii) to visit Bangkok and Thailand. The first five motivations are push factors
whereas the last two are pull factors. These factors are shown in Figure 2, and each factor is then
discussed.
Personal
development and
growth
To help others
To gain new
experiences
To learn/be
Western volunteer immersed in local
tourists' motivations culture in a deeper
way
To meet new
friends
Personal interest in
a certain volunteer
activity
To visit Bangkok
and Thailand
Figure 2. The Motivations of Western Volunteer Tourists
(i) Personal development and growth. This motivation was the most prominent factor driving the
Western respondents to make a volunteer tourism trip. It was found that the Western respondents,
especially those who worked at schools and orphanages, were mainly motivated by a desire to gain
experience that could help them with their future careers, which usually involved working with
children. The following statement from V9 summarises this motivation.
[I am here] because of my job in my home country. I want to teach children at the primary
or secondary school, so for me this is definitely to gain an experience of teaching, to see how
good I am at teaching.
14
What is reflected from the above statement is that the voluntary experience was viewed as a ‘training
ground’ where the respondents could practice their skills, acquire experience, and try out a career of
interest before entering to real working life and making a long-term commitment.
Some Western respondents believed that the volunteering experience would enable them to push their
limits or to ‘prove themselves’ in an unfamiliar setting. In the view of the respondents, an unfamiliar
setting encompasses a number of challenges, including being out of the comfort zone, language barriers,
lack of or limited knowledge of assigned duties and local culture, and lack of familiar facilities. These
challenges forced them to rely primarily on themselves and deal with problems and difficulties without
the help of their family members and/or their friends.
(ii) To help others. Many Western respondents stated that they decided to volunteer during their
holiday because they wanted to help out. Although the respondents used different expressions to
express this motivation such as “to make a difference to society”, “to pay back to society”, “to sacrifice
my own time for the benefit of others”, and “to make the lives of other people, especially those who are
less fortunate, better”, these expressions hold the same intentions of helping others.
Based on the data analysis, it is found that in the perception of these volunteer tourists, as citizens of
high-income, developed countries, they were wealthier, more fortunate, and more capable in terms of
skills and knowledge than the local people who live in a developing country. In the view of these
respondents, being wealthier and more fortunate but not sharing this with other poor and less fortunate
people could be interpreted as selfish and irresponsible. Some Western respondents also stated that
they could not enjoy their own good fortune upon realising that there were many other people who
were suffering from poverty or other troubles. In their opinion, their wealth and good fortune enabled
them to assist in volunteering activities in a developing country. One issue found in the analysis of the
data was that this perspective contained a sense of imperialism in which they viewed that they were
educationally and economically superior to people in Thailand. However, they did not mean to show
off. On the contrary, they wanted to explain their participation in volunteer activities during their
holiday in Thailand.
(iii) To gain new experiences. According to the data, the Western respondents’ desire to gain new
experiences encapsulated two main notions: having different experiences out of their comfort zone or
their home country; and having a volunteering experience which they had never had before. For many
Western respondents, this was the first time they had visited Thailand. Some Western respondents also
believed that participating in a volunteer tourism vacation enabled them to gain a new and challenging
experience of Thailand in a much better and more pleasant way than traditional tourism because it
provided them with an opportunity to do things they had never done before whereas traditional tourism
would only provide them with similar experiences to those they are used to in their own countries. V5
said about traditional tourism that
it seems to give you a different experience, but it fact, you just experience similar things in
the different country because you stay in a luxury hotel, eat food you can eat in your own
country, and travel in a very comfortable vehicle, you can experience all of these things in
your [home] country.
For some Western respondents, this was the first time they had taken a volunteer tourism vacation.
They stated that they wanted to see what it was like, as illustrated by V1: “I just wanted to give it a go
and see what it is like to volunteer.”
15
(iv) To learn/be immersed in local culture in a deeper way. Many Western respondents viewed that
engaging in volunteer tourism is the only way for them to gain in-depth, direct and first-hand
experiences of local culture and such experiences could not be gained through other types of tourism.
For example, V2 stated that participating in other types of tourism activities such as visiting museums
or Buddhist temples or seeing local performances at the theatre could not provide a true understanding
of the local culture because those tourism activities presented only some parts of the culture or are
‘staged experiences’. Other Western respondents expressed a similar view. For example, V3 stated that
volunteer tourism served as an effective means for her to learn the local culture from the ‘inside’ rather
than looking from the ‘outside’.
The perception of volunteer tourism vacations as providing a better opportunity for foreign tourists to
learn and be immersed in the local culture came from the fact that they had to live and work with local
people, and therefore they could see how these people actually live. This enabled them to enjoy an
opportunity to interact with local peoples in a more direct and engaging way.
(v) To meet new friends. Some Western respondents viewed volunteer tourism as a means that brought
together people who had something in common or who shared interests and it also served as a platform
for them to meet and interact with these people. For example, V12 stated that
I want meet new people and make friends because I knew that I would meet other people
who like children, just like me. I think it is a very good opportunity to meet and make friends
with people who have something in common with you, or you like the same thing as you.
Moreover, some Western respondents also added that participating in volunteer tourism could make a
relationship with new friends sustainable and intimate, because doing voluntary work involved tasks
that require patience, time, and labour. Therefore, when working together for a long time, they were
likely to develop meaningful relationships. As expressed by V1
As I have to work with these guys [other volunteer tourists] every day, so we understand
each other and we become friends. I think this friendship will be sustained because we have
memorable time together…We’ve gone through difficult time[s] together.
(vi) Personal interest in a certain volunteer activity. This factor is a pull factor because it represents
attractiveness or attribute of ‘external’ factors that attract tourists to a certain tourism activity. For
example, V3 who did voluntary work at an orphanage stated that she chose to do so because she loved
being with children and felt comfortable with them. She added that because she was an only child and
played alone when she was young, she wanted to spend time with children.
Some Western respondents said that they wanted to volunteer as an English teacher in a non-English
speaking country because it was challenging. A couple of Western respondents expressed the same view
as the Thai respondents, saying that for them the types of volunteer activities are very important
because they would decide to volunteer only in particular activities that they were interested in.
(vii) To visit Bangkok and Thailand. This is another pull factor because it relates to the unique
characteristics of the tourist destination. All of the Western respondents stated that they wanted to
volunteer in Bangkok because Bangkok was one of the world top tourist destinations for Western
tourists. It was well-known as a centre of Thai economics and culture, had a variety of nightlife activities,
offered a range of dining experiences, and was an ideal place for shopping. Moreover, doing volunteer
16
work in Bangkok was also convenient for them if they wished to travel to other famous tourist
destinations in Thailand, nearby such as Ayutthaya, Rajchaburi, and Kanchanaburi Provinces.
Apart from the beauty and popularity of Bangkok, the notion of Thailand as a poor, developing country
with many people in need of assistance was also found to be a pull factor drawing these volunteer
tourists to Thailand. Many respondents stated that they chose Thailand because they believed that their
contribution would be useful and could help people in need. They also believed that there were still
many ways in which they could help local people, in the forms of donation, knowledge, experiences,
and labour.
Comparing motivations of Thai volunteer tourists and Western volunteer tourists

When comparing the motivations of both groups of respondents, it is found that their motivations are
common in some aspects. Three common motivations are found: (i) personal development and growth;
(ii) to gain new experiences; and (iii) personal interest in a certain volunteer activity. The opinions of
these two groups of respondents about participating in volunteer tourism were similar in many ways.
For example, both groups felt that volunteering was a route to challenging and meaningful experiences
that they would not gain from other types of tourism. They also believed that undertaking volunteer
tourism would enable them to prove themselves that they could do things they had never done before,
enhancing the understanding of themselves.
The different motivations were: (i) to gain inner happiness; (ii) to help others; (iii) to learn/be immersed
in the local culture in a deeper way; (v) to meet new friends; and (v) to visit Bangkok and Thailand. A
desire to gain inner happiness was found only among the Thai respondents, and the rest belonged to
the Western respondents. A desire for inner happiness was closely related to a desire to help others,
which was found to be one of the Western respondents’ motivations. However, based on the data
analysis, a desire for inner happiness appears to be a more self-interested motivation whereas a desire
to help others is an other-oriented or altruistic motivation. This is because the responses of the Thai
respondents on their desire to gain inner happiness emphasised benefits to themselves as their ultimate
goal while the responses of the Western respondents emphasised benefits that other people would gain
when speaking of their desire to help others. This suggests that the ultimate goal of the Western
respondents is to make the lives of other people better and give back to society although they may hope
to also benefit from their contribution.
As for the remaining different motivations, according to the data analysis, these three motivations were
closely related to the notion of unfamiliarity with the destination. In other words, it can be interpreted
that these motivations are likely to occur among foreign tourists who participate in volunteer tourism
in an unfamiliar country. For example, a desire to be immersed in the local culture only occurred among
the Western respondents because, for them, Thai culture was new and different whereas the Thai
respondents were already familiar with the local culture.
As for a desire to meet new friends, this was found only in the group of Western respondents, perhaps
because they normally had to stay in a place that the host organisation arranged for them, therefore
they knew that they would have an opportunity to meet and live alongside with other volunteer tourists.
It was likely that such knowledge led them to expect opportunities to meet and make new friends during
their volunteering. However, among the Thai respondents, it was found that they did not stay at the
place arranged by the host organisations, but rather ‘commuted’, going back and forth. This may explain
the reason why they did not expect to meet and make friends with other people.
17
For the motivation to visit Bangkok, it is not surprising that it was found only in the Western
respondents, who selected Bangkok as a place for volunteering because of its reputation as a tourist
attraction. Volunteering was not only their sole activity in Bangkok, nor their only purpose of their visit.
These Western tourists also wanted to visit attractions in Bangkok when they were free from their
volunteering duties. The beauty and popularity of Bangkok represented an important factor pulling
them to participate in volunteer tourism there whereas for the Thai respondents, although they also
visited tourist attractions or went shopping in Bangkok alongside volunteering, such a motivation had
no influence on their decision to volunteer in Bangkok, as many of them lived in Bangkok or provinces
nearby and were already familiar with the city.
Discussion
The findings of this study indicate that the motivations of both groups of the volunteer tourists are
multidimensional, and consist of both push and pull factors. This finding is concurrent with several
other studies (Agyeiwaah, 2013; Ali & Rahman, 2019; Benson & Seibert, 2009; Grimm & Needham, 2012;
Otoo, 2013; Otoo & Amuquandoh, 2014), which argue that the volunteer tourists are not likely to be
motivated by a single motivation, but rather, a combination of motivations where both push and pull
motives are present.
Moreover, the finding also supports Dann’s (1977; 1981) notion of push and pull factors which states that
tourists tend to be aware of their inner needs before making a decision on the types of tourism activities
and their destination. In other words, tourists are influenced by push factors before pull factors. Based
on the findings of this study, when asked about their motivations for volunteering tourism, all
respondents mentioned push factors before pull factors. For example, one respondent stated that she
decided to take a volunteer tourism trip because she wanted to gain inner happiness from doing good
deeds; then she researched voluntary opportunities; and finally decided to work for the orphanage. This
is an example that shows that normally tourists become aware of their inner needs before thinking or
deciding about the activities.
All the push factors found in both groups of the respondents support Otoo & Amuquandoh’s (2014:52)
argument that they represent “the availability elsewhere of experiences that may not be found at the
generating region” and reflect “the influence of the destination in stirring volunteer tourists’ desire to
undertake the travel”. Specifically, these motivations are “intangible” desires of the volunteer tourists
or benefits that they sought to gain from the volunteer tourism experience, and they believed that they
could not gain such benefits at their hometown (for a case of the Thai respondents) or their home
countries (for a case of the Western respondents).
This study also finds that push factors alone do not have sufficient influence to drive a tourist to make
a final decision to participate in a volunteer tourism trip, rather the final decision comes from the
influence of both push and pull factors together. Upon analysing the responses of the volunteer tourists,
this study argues that although the push factors appear to be very influential in the decision-making
process, they are not powerful enough to lead to a final decision. The findings show that all the
respondents mentioned that they would only decide to engage in a volunteer tourism vacation once
they believed that a certain volunteer activity and/or a certain destination where the volunteer activity
took place could satisfy their personal interests. For volunteer tourism in which the voluntary
component represents the highlight of the whole trip, the characteristics or attributes of particular
activities and/or destinations seem to have a very important role for tourists. Many respondents
emphasised that they would not undertake a volunteer tourism trip if they could not find a specific
volunteer activity and/or a destination that matched their personal interest.
18
The characteristics or attributes of the volunteer activities are found to play a big part in the decision-
making process of the volunteer tourists. The respondents did not just take any volunteer activity
available, but paid very special attention to it. For example, one respondent who was short-sighted
decided to volunteer by reading a book and creating tactile books for the blinds because he hoped that
such practice would be ‘rewarded’, and that he would somehow be protected from blindness, both in
this life and the next.
For the Western volunteer tourists, the attributes of the destination were also significant. The data
analysis indicates that for these tourists, not only the beauty and popularity of the destination as a
tourist attraction, but also their belief that their volunteering would have a big impact for that
destination also represented a significant pull factor that drew them to Bangkok. Similar to the issue of
the characteristics of volunteer activities, Western volunteer tourists stated that they did not just go
anywhere for volunteer tourism, but chose a destination that would allow them to benefit the locals.
Moreover, this study also finds that a chosen destination should also fulfil their needs for leisure
activities because these tourists also wanted to enjoy the beauty of the place as general tourists when
they were free from volunteer work. This finding concurs with the study of Godfrey (2018).
It is evident that the pull factors which include characteristics of a volunteer tourism activity and
attributes of a destination depict ‘tangible’ opportunities for the volunteer tourists to fulfil their desires
or to gain the benefits they sought after. In other words, the volunteer tourists believed that the tangible
attributes of a volunteer tourism activity and the destination (Bangkok, Thailand) had specific contexts
that enabled them to fulfil their intangible desires.
The two common motivations found in both groups of the respondents including personal development
and growth, and a desire to gain new experiences are often reported in previous studies (e.g. Broad,
2003; Chen & Chen, 2011; Galley & Clifton, 2004; Harrow & Promfret, 2007; Proyrungroj, 2017a; Wearing,
2001) due to the learning nature of volunteer tourism experiences and the powerful influence of the
context in which volunteer tourism takes place. The challenging nature of volunteer tourism
significantly enhances the learning impact of the volunteer tourists because these tourists have to deal
with difficulties and stress during working. This finding supports an argument that volunteer tourism
experiences are powerful means of learning which enable the volunteer tourists to develop a range of
skills, learn new things, prove themselves; and enhance the understanding of themselves (Broad, 2003;
Chen & Chen, 2011; Harlow & Promfret, 2007; Jones, 2005; Wearing 2001; Zahra & McIntosh, 2007).
The finding of this study also reports some different motivations between both groups of the
respondents. The first different motivation is to gain inner happiness which was found only among the
Thai respondents. This finding is a result of the influence of Buddhist teaching on Thai people. The
other motivations, including to learn/be immersed in local culture in a deeper way; to meet new friends;
and to visit Bangkok and Thailand, were found only in the groups of the Western respondents because
they are closely related to the notion of unfamiliarity with the destination. This finding agrees with
other authors (Ali & Rahman, 2009; Benson & Seibert, 2009; Pan, 2012) who argue that the overseas and
unfamiliar context of the volunteer tourism destination serve as a powerful driving forces for the
international volunteer tourists to participate in a volunteer vacation abroad.
The last different motivation between both groups of the respondents is a desire to help others. The
main reason that this motivation was found only among the Western volunteer tourists is that these
people thought of themselves as citizens of high-income, developed countries, and that it was their
responsibility as global citizens to share their wealth. This finding is consistent with the studies of
19
Proyrungroj (2017a) and Proyrungroj (2017b) which find that the perception of the Western volunteer
tourists is highly influenced by a sense of imperialism in which they viewed that they were educationally
and economically superior, or better off than, people in a developing country, and such superiority
enabled them to lend a hand to help people in that country.
The finding in this study regarding the altruistic and self-interested dimensions of volunteer tourism
motivations challenges the existing literature, which claims that both altruism and egoism play
important roles in motivating the volunteer tourist to participate in volunteer tourism experiences; that
these two dimensions are closely interconnected; and that there is an unclear boundary between them
(e.g. Broad, 2003; Brown, 2005; Chen & Chen, 2011; Lo & Lee, 2011; Mustonen, 2007; Proyrungroj, 2017a;
Sin, 2009; Söderman & Snead, 2008; Wearing, 2001). This is because, in this study, only self-interested
motivations were identified in the Thai volunteer tourists. Possible explanations for this may lie on the
fact that Thailand is still a low-to-middle-income, developing country, and the majority of Thai people
are still poor therefore the Thai volunteer tourists do not generally perceive themselves as being in a
position to help others, and perhaps do not feel the same moral obligation or gulf of privilege. A sense
of global citizenship is not the norm for Thai people, and volunteering is still new to them. Even though
when the Thai respondents mentioned their desire for inner happiness, they also said that they were
happy when they saw that their help could make lives of other people better. Yet, in this case, the welfare
of other people was not their ultimate goal, instead, their ultimate goal was their own benefits.
The analysis of the data reveals that the ‘inner happiness’ motivation was largely influenced by the
Buddhist teaching that ‘if you do good things, good things will happen to you’. The benefits that other
people may receive from such practice were the consequences of such actions, not their ultimate goal.
For most Thai Buddhists, the ultimate goal of doing good deeds was to accumulate merit for the next
life in the hope that this accumulated merit would make their lives better. Therefore, a desire for inner
happiness is considered a self-interested motivation.
However, for the Western volunteer tourists, both altruistic and self-interested motivations were found.
A desire to help others represents an altruistic motivation whereas the rest are self-interest motivations.
The study finds that the benefits of others were not the respondents’ sole ultimate desire because they
also hoped that they would benefit from such practice, such as feeling proud of themselves, and being
relieved from a feeling a guilt at being born more fortunate. In this case, their motivations cannot be
identified as ‘pure altruism’ according to Batson’s (1991) altruism/self-interest concept because the
volunteer tourists’ self-benefits are not unintended consequences, but rather part of their ultimate goal.
This finding leads to an argument of this study that the motivation of helping others consists of multiple
layers of ultimate goal in which the benefits of others and one’s own benefits are both present, and (in
the case of this study) the former outweighs the latter. Perhaps a concept of reciprocal altruism as
proposed by Söderman & Snead (2008) is the right term to explain this.
Conclusion and implications

The findings of this study expand the knowledge of the nature and roles of push and pull factors in
motivating people to engage in a vacation in the context of volunteer tourism. Moreover, they also
confirm the previous studies on motivations of the volunteer tourists from the North countries taking
a volunteer trip in the South country that these tourists are influenced by both push and pull factors,
and their motivations are reciprocal altruistic in nature. At the same time, this study contributes to new
knowledge on the motivations of people of the South country volunteering in their own country. The
findings also shed light on similarities and differences of the volunteer tourism motivations of people
20
from the North countries and the South countries who have different geographical and cultural
backgrounds.
In summary, the main contributions of this study can be contextualised into three main aspects: (i) the
nature and important roles of push and pull factors in the context of volunteer tourism motivations,
and the relationship of these two motivational factors in volunteer tourists’ motivations; (ii) the
influence of the volunteer tourists’ perception of themselves on the motivations to volunteer; and (iii)
the nature of reciprocal altruism in the motivation of helping others.
First, this study argues that push and pull motivational factors of the volunteer tourists are somewhat
distinct from those of the conventional tourists, in that the push motives of volunteer tourists seem to
represent an altruistic, learning, and meaningful nature of volunteer tourism experiences. Desires of or
benefits sought by the volunteer tourists show that they decide to take a volunteer vacation because
they want to do good things for either themselves or others, and at the same time, they also want to
develop themselves. For the pull factors, they do not only represent an unfamiliar setting or an
opportunity for the volunteer tourists to fulfil their desires/benefits sought, but also act as an attraction
for them to perform other leisure activities. It is the fact that the volunteer tourists do not spend their
whole holiday for only volunteering activities, but rather, they spend part of their free time travelling
to other tourist spots. Furthermore, this study also reveals that push factors alone are not powerful
enough to motivate volunteer tourists to engage in a volunteer tourism vacation as their final decision
comes from pull factors, such as characteristics of a certain volunteer activity and/or a destination. To
conclude, push and pull factors have to work together to motivate people to engage in a volunteer
vacation. In the context of volunteer tourism, push factors represent ‘intangible’ desires or benefits that
tourists believed they could not fulfil or gain from the usual environment (e.g. a desire to gain inner
happiness, a desire to help others, personal development and growth) whereas pull factors act as a
‘tangible’ opportunity for the tourists to fulfil their desires/benefits sought.
Second, the finding on the differences in the motivations of the Thai tourists and the Western tourists
reveals that the tourists’ perception of themselves has a strong influence on their motivations to
volunteer. Based on the finding, the Thai volunteer tourists’ motivations are all self-interested because
they do not perceive that they are superior to those that receive their help, since they are citizens of a
poor, developing country. However, for the Western volunteer tourists who are citizens of high-income,
developed countries, their motivations are a combination of altruism and self-interest. Their altruistic
motivation (a desire to help others) comes from their perception that they are better off than those who
receive their assistance in terms of economics, knowledge and social status and therefore, it is their
responsibility to share their wealth, knowledge and skills with those that are less fortunate.
Third, this study argues that a desire to help others, which was found among the Western volunteer
tourists, is not ‘pure’ altruistic, but rather a ‘reciprocal altruistic’ motivation which means that a desire
to help others is a motivation that has a blurred boundary between altruism and egoism. It is evident
from the findings that all Western respondents seemed to have some difficulties to tell whether their
ultimate goal of such desire was for the welfare of aid-recipients or for their own benefits. In their
opinion, it could be both as they explained that they wanted the aid-recipients to have better life from
their helps, and at the same time, they wished that they could benefit from their action. In this case,
this motivation cannot be regarded ‘pure altruism’ based on Batson’s altruism concept because the
ultimate goal of the volunteer tourists is not solely the benefit of others, instead, it consists of multiple
layers in which a desire for the benefits of others and one’s own benefits are both present.
21
In terms of practical implication, the findings of this study provide an insight for related stakeholders
including the government, local people, and volunteer tourism organisations about the motivations of
volunteer tourists, both Thai and Western tourists. Specifically, these findings can serve as useful
information for the stakeholders in designing and promoting volunteer tourism projects so that such
projects can perfectly fulfil the desires of or benefits sought by the tourists, leading them to have high
satisfaction as well as continue to engage in volunteer vacations again in the future, and/or recommend
to others.
Limitations and directions for future research

The limitations of this study are associated with the methodological approach used. As an interpretive
paradigm utilising qualitative methods was used in this study, and the findings of the study are mainly
based on data gathered from a small number of respondents selected from non-probability sampling,
together with the researcher’s understanding and interpretation of her encounters with the
respondents, these findings are unique and cannot be generalised to other groups of volunteer tourists.
However, it is not the aim of this study to generalise its findings because it is not applicable to a study
of qualitative study, instead, this study aims to gain a rich, in-depth insight of the volunteer tourists’
motivations.
In terms of future research, as this study focuses on identifying and comparing the motivations of Thai
and Western volunteer tourists who clearly have different backgrounds, especially in terms of their
geographical and cultural backgrounds and economic status of their countries of origin. Therefore,
future research should examine the similarities and differences of motivations between Thai tourists
and tourists from other low-to-middle-income, developing countries.
Moreover, this study looks only at the motivations driving the volunteer tourists to take a volunteer
tourism vacation, which means that it studies only the factors that influence tourists’ decision before
the tourists make their decision. It doesn’t look at what occurs after the tourists engage in volunteer
tourism. Therefore, more research focusing on the experiences the volunteer tourists have gained and
the impact of such practice on the volunteer tourists is needed.
References
Ackerberg, I. & Prapasawudi, P. (2009) An analysis of volunteer tourism using the repertory grid
technique (Unpublished Master’s degree dissertation). University of Gothenburg. Göteborg, Sweden.
Agyeiwaah, E. (2013) Volunteer tourists’ motivations for choosing homestay in the Kumasi Metropolis
of Ghana. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure 2(3), 1-11.
Ali, J.N. & Rahman, A. (2019) Why do people opt for voluntourism in Bangladesh? An exploratory study.
Journal of Tourism Quarterly 1(1), 53-65.
Anthony, I. & Rosenbaum, M.S. (2012) Beyond hardcore gambling: Understanding why mainland
Chinese visit casinos in Macau. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 36, 32-51.
doi:10.1177/1096348010380600.
Atkinson, L.R., Atkinson, C.R. & Hilgard, R.E. (1983) Introduction to psychology. 8th edn. New York, NY:
Harcourt Brace Jovanich.
Batson, C.D. (1991) The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Batson, C.D. (2008) Empathy-induced altruistic motivation. Draft of Lecture/chapter for Inaugural
Herzliya Symposium on Prosocial Motives, Emotion, and Behaviour. March 24-27, 2008. URL:
http://portal.idc.ac.il/en/Symposium/HerzliyaSymposium/Documents/ dcBatson.pdf (Accessed on
13.12.2011).
22
Benson, B. & Seibert,N. (2009) Volunteer tourism: motivations of German participants in South Africa.
Annals of Leisure Research 12 (3-4), 295-314.
Benson, A.M. & Wearing, S. (2012) Volunteer tourism: Commodified trend or new phenomenon? in
Moufakkir, O. & Burns, P.M (eds) (2012) Controversies in Tourism, Wallingford: CABI, 242-254.
Billig, S. H. & Root, S. (2006) Maximizing civic commitment through service-learning: Case studies of
effective high school classrooms. In Casey, K. M., G. Davidson, S. H. Billig, & N. C. Springer (eds.)
(2006) Advancing knowledge in service-learning: Research to transform the field. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age, 45-66.
Blichfeldt B.S. & Kessler, I. (2009) Interpretive consumer research: uncovering the “whys” underlying
tourist behavior.In Kozak, M. & Decrop, A. (eds.) (2009) Handbook of tourist behavior: theory &
practice. London: Routledge, 3-15.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology
3(2), 77-101.
Bringle, R. G. & Hatcher, J.A. (2011) International service learning. In Bringle, R. G., Hatcher, J. A. &
Jones, S. G. (eds.) (2011) International service learning: Conceptual frameworks and research. Sterling,
VA: Stylus Publishing, 3-28.
Broad, S. (2003) Living the Thai life – A case study of volunteer tourism at the Gibbon Rehabilitation
project, Thailand. Tourism Recreation Research 28(3), 63-72.
Brown, S. (2005) Travelling with a purpose: Understanding the motives and benefits of volunteer
vacationers. Current Issues in Tourism 8(6), 479-496.
Brown, S. & Morrison, A.M. (2003) Expanding volunteer vacation participation: an exploratory study on
the mini-mission concept. Tourism Recreation Research 28(3), 73-82.
Caissie, L. T. & Halpenny, E.A. (2003) Volunteering for nature: Motivations for participating in a
biodiversity conservation volunteer program. World Leisure 45(2), 38–50.
Callanan, M. & Thomas, S. (2005) Volunteer tourism– Deconstructing volunteer activities within a
dynamic environment. In Novelli, M. (ed.) (2005) Niche tourism contemporary issues, trends and
cases. Oxford: Elsevier/Butterworth-Heinemann, 183-200.
Campbell, L. M. & Smith, C. (2005) Volunteering for sea turtles? Characteristics and motives of
volunteers working with the Caribbean Conservation Corporation in Tortuguero, Costa Rica. MAST
3(2), 169–193.
Carter, K.A. (2008) Volunteer tourism: An exploration of the perceptions and experiences of volunteer
tourists and the role of authenticity in those experiences (Unpublished Master’s degree dissertation).
Lincoln University, New Zealand.
Chen, L. & Chen, J.S. (2011) The motivations and expectations of international volunteer tourists: A case
study of “Chinese Village Traditions”. Tourism Management 32, 435-442.
Clary, E.G. & Snyder, M. (1991) A functional analysis of altruism and prosocial behaviour: The case of
volunteerism. In Clark, M. (ed.) (1991) Review of personality and social psychology. Vol.12. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage, 119-148.
Cohen, E. (1972) Toward a sociology of international tourism. Social Research 39(1), 164-182.
Crompton, J.L. (1979) Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research 6(4), 408-424.
Dann, G. (1977) Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 4(4), 184-194.
Dann, G. (1981) Tourist motivation an appraisal. Annals of Tourism Research 8 (2), 187-219.
Denscombe, M. (2007) The Good research guide: For small-scale social research projects. 3rd ed.
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Dovidio, J.F., Piliavin, J.A. Schroeder, D.A. & Penner, A. (2006) The social psychology of prosocial
behaviour. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Duffy, R. (2001) A trip too far: ecotourism, politics and exploitation. London: Earthscan.
Fodness, D. (1994) Measuring tourist motivation. Annals of Tourism Research 21(3), 555-581.
23
Freidus, A.L. (2016) Unanticipated outcomes of volunteerism among Malawi’s orphans. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism. DOI:10.1080/09669582.2016.1263308.
Galley, G. & Clifton, J. (2004) The motivational and demographic characteristics of research ecotourists:
Operation Wallacea volunteers in south-east Sulawesi, Indonesia. Journal of Ecotourism 3(1), 69-82.
GoAbroad.com (2018) Volunteer in Thailand, Asia. URL: http://www. volunteerabroad.com (Accessed
on 02.01. 2018).
Godfrey, J. (2018) Commodified volunteer tourism and consumer culture: a case study from Cusco, Peru.
European Journal of Tourism Research 19, 136-139.
Gray, N.J. & Campbell, L.M. (2007) A decommodified experience? Exploring aesthetic, economic and
ethical values for volunteer ecotourism in Costa Rica. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15(5), 463-482.
Grimm, K.E. & Needham, M.D. (2012) Internet promotional material and conservation volunteer tourist
motivations: A case study of selecting organizations and projects. Tourism Management Perspectives
1, 17-27.
Gross, D.R. (1992) Psychology: The science of mind and behaviour. 2nd edn, London: Hodder and
Stoughton.
Guttentag, D.A. (2009) The possible negative impacts of volunteer tourism. International Journal of
Tourism Research 11(6), 537-551.
Harlow, S. & Pomfret, G. (2007) Evolving environmental tourism experiences in Zambia. Journal of
Ecotourism 6(3), 184-209.
Henderson, K.A., L.A. Bedini (1995) Notes on linking qualitative and quantitative data. Journal of
Therapeutic Recreation 29, 124-130
Holden, A. (2006) Tourism studies and the social sciences. London: Routledge.
Hollinshead, K. (1996) The tourism researcher as bricoleur: The new wealth and diversity in qualitative
inquiry. Tourism Analysis 1, 67-74.
Issac, R. K. (2010) Alternative tourism: New forms of tourism in Bethlehem for the Palestinian tourism
industry. Current Issues in Tourism 13(1), 21-36.
Jones, A. (2005) Assessing international youth service programmes in two low income countries.
Voluntary Action: The Journal of the Institute for Volunteering Research 7(2), 87-100.
Kontogeorgopoulos, N. (2017) Finding oneself while discovering others: An existential perspective on
volunteer tourism in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research 65, 1-12.
Lepp, A. (2009) Leisure and obligation: An investigation of volunteer tourists’ experience at Kenya’s
Taita Discovery Center. Journal of Leisure Research 41(2), 253-260.
Li, M., Zhang, H. & Cai, L.A. (2016) A subcultural analysis of tourism motivations. Journal of Hospitality
& Tourism Research 40(1), 85-113.
Lo, A. & Lee, C. (2011) Motivations and perceived value of volunteer tourists from Hong Kong. Tourism
Management 32, 326-334.
Lyons, K. (2003) Ambiguities in volunteer tourism: A case study of Australians participating in a J-1
Visitor Exchange Program. Tourism Recreation Research 28(3), 5-13.
Lyons, K., Hanley, J. Wearing, S. & Neil, J. (2012) Gap year volunteer tourism: Myths of global citizenship.
Annals of Tourism Research 39(1), 361-378.
McGehee, N.G. & Andereck, K.L. (2009) Volunteer tourism and the “voluntoured”: The case of Tijuana,
Mexico. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 17(1), 39-51.
McGehee, N.G & Santos C. (2005) Social change, discourse and volunteer tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research 32(3), 760-779.
McIntosh, A.J. & Zahra, A. (2007) A cultural encounter through volunteer tourism: Towards the ideals
of sustainable tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15(5), 541-556.
Mehmetoglu, M. & Altinay, L. (2006) Examination of grounded theory analysis with an application to
hospitality research. International Journal of Hospitality Management 25, 12-33.
24
Morgan, J. (2010) Volunteer tourism: What are the benefits for international development? The
VolunTourist Newsletter 6(2). URL: http://www.voluntourism.org/news-studyandresearch 62.htm
(Accessed on 15.07.2014)
Mostafanezad, M. (2014) Volunteer tourism: Popular humanitarianism in neoliberal times. Farnham:
Ashgate.
Munt, I. (1994) Eco-tourism or ego-tourism? Race and Class 36, 49-60.
Mustonen, P. (2006) Volunteer tourism: Postmodern pilgrimage? Journal of Tourism and Cultural
Change 3(3), 160-177
Mustonen, P. (2007) Volunteer tourism – Altruism or mere tourism? Anatolia: An International Journal
of Tourism and Hospitality Research 18(1), 97-115.
Nestora, A., Yeung, P. & Calderon, H. (2009) Volunteer travel insights 2009. Bradt travel guides, Lasso
communications. GeckoGo. URL: http://www.geckogo.com/volunteer/report2009 (Accessed on
25.08.2019).
Ooi, N. & Laing, J.H. (2010) Backpacker tourism: Sustainable and purposeful? Investigating the overlap
between backpacker tourism and volunteer tourism motivations. Journal of Sustainable Tourism
18(2), 191-206.
Otto, F.E. (2013) Motivations of American volunteer tourists to Ghana. African Journal of Hospitality,
Tourism and Leisure 2(4), 1-12
Otoo, F.E. & Amuquandoh, F.E. (2014) An exploration of the motivations for volunteering: A study of
international volunteer tourists to Ghana. Tourism Management Perspectives 11, 51-57.
Page, S. & Connell, J. (2009) Tourism: a modern synthesis. Andover, MA: South-Western Cengage
Learning.
Pan, T. (2012) Motivations of volunteer overseas and what have we learned-The experience of Taiwanese
students. Tourism Management 33(6), 1493-1501.
Parrinello, G.L. (1993) Motivation and anticipation in post-industrial tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research 20(2), 233-421.
Pearce, P.L. & Lee, U. (2005) Developing the travel career approach to tourist motivation. Journal of
Travel Research 43(3), 226-237.
Proyrungroj, R. (2017a) Orphan volunteer tourism in Thailand: Volunteer tourists’ motivations and on-
site experiences. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 41(5), 560-584.
Proyrungroj, R. (2017b) Host-guest relationship in the context of volunteer tourism. European Journal
of Tourism Research 16, 177-200
Raymond, E. (2007) Making a difference: Good practice in volunteer tourism (Unpublished Master’s
degree dissertation). University of Otago, New Zealand.
Raymond, E.M. & Hall, C.M. (2008) The development of cross-cultural (mis)understanding through
volunteer tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 16(5), 530-543.
Richards, G. & Wilson, J. (2006) Developing creativity in tourist experiences: A solution to the serial
reproduction of culture? Tourism Management 27, 1209-1223.
Sharpley, R. (2003) Tourism, tourists & society. 3rd (revised) ed. Huntingdon: ELM.
Sharpley, R. (2006) Travel and tourism. London: Sage.
Simpson, K. (2005) Broad horizons? Geographies and pedagogies of gap year (Unpublished PhD thesis).
University of Newcastle, Newcastle, UK.
Sin, H.L. (2009) Volunteer tourism – “Involve me and I will learn”? Annals of Tourism Research 36(3),
480-501.
Sin, H.L. (2010) Who are we responsible to? Locals’ tales of volunteer tourism. Geoforum 41(6), 983-992.
Söderman, N. & Snead, S.L. (2008) Opening the gap: The motivation of gap year travellers to volunteer
in Latin America. In Lyons, K. D. & Wearing S. (eds.) (2008) Journeys of Discovery in Volunteer.
Wallingford: CABI, 118-129.
25
Stoddart, H. & Rogerson, C.M. (2004) Volunteer tourism: The case of Habitat for Humanity South
Africa. GeoJournal 60(3), 311-318.
Suba, P. (2017) Motives for young people to volunteer abroad: A case study of AIESEC interns from the
perspective of volunteer tourism. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure 6(3), 1-11.
Tomazos, K. & Butler, R. (2009) Volunteer tourism: the new ecotourism? Anatolia: An International
Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research 20(1), 196-211.
Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT) (2010) TAT Fine-tunes Its 2011 Marketing strategies in Europe. URL:
http://www.tatnews.org/tat_release/ detail.asp?id=5169(Accessed on 12.01.2012).
Tourism Research and Marketing (TRAM) (2008) Volunteer tourism: A global analysis. Arnhem,
Netherlands: ATLAS.
Van der Meer, K. (2007) Perspectives on ecotourism and volunteer tourism in post tsunami Khao Lak,
Thailand (Unpublished Master’s degree dissertation). University of Victoria, Canada.
Walle, A.H. (1997) Quantitative versus qualitative tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research 24(3),
524-536.
Wearing, S. (2001) Volunteer tourism: Experiences that make difference. Wallingford: CAB International.
Wearing, S. (2004) Examining best practice in volunteer tourism. In Stebbins, R.A., M. Graham (eds.)
(2004) Volunteering as Leisure, Leisure as Volunteering-An International Assessment. Oxon: CABI,
209-224.
Wearing, W. & McGehee, N.G. (2013) Volunteer tourism: A review. Tourism Management 38, 120-130.
Witt, A.C. & Wright, L.P. (1992) Tourist motivation: Life after Maslow. In Johnson, P., B.Thomas, (eds)
(1992) Choice and Demand in Tourism. London: Mansell, 33-35.
Yates, M. & Youniss, J. (1998) Community service and political identity development in adolescence.
Journal of Social Issues 54(3), 495–512.
Yu, H.C. (2008) An examination of the effects of participation in a college study abroad program
(Unpublished PhD thesis). The Pennsylvania State University, USA.
Zahra, A. & McIntosh, A.J. (2007) Volunteer tourism: Evidence of cathartic tourist experiences. Tourism
Recreation Research 32(1), 115-119.
26
#10yearschallenge: how co-creation permeated tourism research.
Marco Tregua 1*, Anna D’Auria 2 and Harry Costin 3
1
University Federico II of Naples. Monte S. Angelo Campus, Via Cintia, 21,80126 Naples, Italy. E-mail:
marco.tregua@unina.it
2 University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas, 23071 Jaén, Spain.
3 Cyprus International Institute of Management, Limassol Campus, 3-5 Chaidariou Str. 3020 Limassol, Cyprus.
Abstract
This paper focuses on the conceptual ties between co-creation and tourism that can be found in the academic
literature on tourism of the last 10 years with a two-fold purpose: to analyze the main conceptual themes that link
co-creation and tourism, and to identify fruitful future research streams.
A bibliometric analysis of the literature from 2008 to 2018 allowed for a systematic analysis of links between key
constructs. Findings suggest that there are significant opportunities to further explore the connections between co-
creation and tourism experience, considered as a multi-actor process based on engagement leading to innovation,
and enabling new tourist experiences. Five perspectives on tourism experience emerged from the analysis: firm-
inspired, technology-based, and cultural-based experience; customer satisfaction and participation, and
innovation-based experience. These suggest several potential research streams as tourism experiences are
recognized to be dynamically co-created through a participatory and engaging process by multiple actors using
innovative and technology-based value propositions. Three conceptual pillars emerge from the theoretical analysis:
co-creation, as the engine of the process; tourist experience, as the outcome of the co-creative process; and
technology, as a key tool to co-create satisfactory tourist experiences.
Keywords: Tourism, Co-Creation, Experience, Technology, Service-dominant logic
Citation: Tregua, M., D’Auria, A. and Costin, H. (2020). #10yearschallenge: how co-creation permeated tourism
research. A bibliometric analysis. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2409.

RESEARCH PAPER 1
#10yearschallenge: how co-creation permeated tourism research. A bibliometric analysis
Introduction
The tourism industry is experiencing significant structural changes because of complex and new
relationships among its key actors and stakeholders (Altinay et al.; 2016; McComb et al., 2017). Leading
the discussing on these recent trends UNWTO (2018) has reported on initiatives to share knowledge on
key novel elements in the tourism business, such as the changing role of technology, the achievement
of sustainable goals, and the strive for quality, inclusiveness, and community empowerment (Pulido-
Fernández and Rodríguez-Díaz, 2016). Also, scholars are paying increased attention to these changes in
the tourism industry. For instance, the tourism-value chain has been affected, and the internet has
brought about a reshuffling of the industry, with traditional actors like travel agencies fading away, and
new operators conquering the stage (e.g., Airbnb and Booking.com) bringing about a robust reshaping
of B2B and B2C relationships and a new market logic (Aznar et al., 2019). Further significant changes to
the value proposition have been brought about by smartphones (Molz, 2012) and the Internet of Things
(Sigala and Gretzel, 2017), while some others are on the horizon, such as the impact on tourism of robots
and artificial intelligence (Ivanov and Webster, 2018).
Recent marketing studies have described the new roles played by the actors of the tourism industry
(Prior and Marcos-Cuevas, 2016; Viglia et al., 2018) – also when contributing to co-create experiences
(Sigala, 2016) –, and the role of technologies (Israel et al., 2019; Ivanov, 2019). Most of the scholarly
contributions have been influenced by the Service-dominant logic (SDL) framework, which discusses
the role of the different actors and the relevance of a multi-actor approach in service provision (Vargo
and Lusch, 2004; 2008; Lusch and Vargo, 2014). Recently, Vargo and Lusch (2016) described the multi-
actor phenomenon as supporting the understanding of a web of relationships instead of simply dyadic
ones. These relationships shape the context in which value is co-created for the beneficiary by multiple
actors. The growing relevance and interest in co-creation is an increasingly common thread in tourism
research (von Friedrichs Grängsjö and Gummesson, 2006; Snepenger et al., 2007; Altinay et al., 2016;
Kamboj and Rahman, 2017).
Research on tourism through an SDL lens has led to describe tourists’ involvement in proposing value
creation opportunities (Li, 2014), partnerships as leading to new experiences (Buhalis and Neuhofer,
2017; Prebensen and Xie, 2017), tourists’ reviews and bloggers as affecting the expected experiences
(Sigala and Gretzel, 2017), online platforms as hosting a whirl of technology-mediated relationships and
information (Buhalis and Neuhofer, 2017; Varkaris and Neuhofer, 2017), and also the role of
revolutionary technologies such as robotics (Ivanov et al., 2019), leading to customer-to-customer (C2C)
co-creation practices in tourism (Heinonen et al., 2018; Rihova et al., 2015; Rihova et al., 2018).
The attention to C2C has grown due to the interactions occurring in both the physical and virtual
contexts, with the latter one increasing significantly in recent years. E.g., Rihova et al. (2018) stressed
online contacts as a way to encourage C2C co-creation and to expand the interactions, and thereby the
potential outcomes of co-creative processes.
These trends have led to an interest in additional research on how technology is shaping the tourists’
behaviour (Cohen et al., 2014) and on how new relationships between key actors affect co-creation in
the tourism industry (Högberg and Olsson, 2018).
This paper focuses on the conceptual ties between co-creation and tourism found in the recent
academic literature, with a two-fold aim, namely (a) to analyze the main conceptual themes that link
co-creation and tourism, and (b) to identify fertile venues for future research.
2
Tregua et al. (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2409
The next section reviews traditional constructs in the research literature on tourism such as the
construction of tourism experiences, with an emphasis on co-creation. The constructs are not new in
the literature; what is new is the role of tourists as co-creators of the tourism experience, including in
real time (Buhalis and Sinarta, 2019). A gap remains in the literature concerning the ways to systematize
co-creation in tourism studies, as stressed by Eide et al. (2017) in their call for additional research mainly
on how customers join the tourist experience co-creation process.
In an effort to contribute to close the gap in the literature, this paper uses a bibliometric approach to
map the recent literature, and analyses how the traditional research constructs interact in novel ways
to enhance the ‘tourism experience’: e.g., Duerden et al. (2015) combine the construct of tourism
experience with consumer culture theory and service-dominant logic.
For the bibliometric analysis two academic scientific databases were used: Web of Science and Scopus.
The findings include five ‘tourism experience’ research perspectives. These five perspectives are then
contrasted and synthesized resulting in an integrated definition of the tourism experience through the
conceptual lens of co-creation. Finally, fertile areas for future research are identified.
Theoretical overview
Technology is transforming the tourism industry in multiple ways. For example, the digitalization
process has altered the relationship between companies and their competitors and also between
companies and their customers. For Fuentes-Blasco et al. (2017: 1), “in tourism, the adoption of
Information and Communication Technologies (hereinafter ICT) and variables concerning firms' links
with suppliers have been recognized as key determinants to improve companies' competitiveness”. With
regards to the new role of customers, recently Vigolo (2017: 85) stated that “the increasing pervasiveness
of information and communication technologies (ICTs) has radically transformed travel behaviour”.
Using digital tools such as apps companies are increasingly focusing on the tourists’ global experience,
even more than on the specific tourism activities, thereby engaging the tourist as a co-creator, since
his/her behaviour and reactions can strongly affect his/her perception and the way in which he/she
joins the experience. This shift implies a significant restructuring of the industry and the virtuous cycle
(Stamboulis and Skayannis, 2003), which activated by knowledge favours the development of new
content and reputation, in a process based on tourists-firm interactions. Through the concrete
involvement of the tourists, companies can redesign and shape offerings based upon the clients’ implicit
or explicit suggestions and also the interaction among customers and other stakeholders in general.
A number of contributions have stressed the importance of the tourist as a co-creator (Altinay et al.,
2016; Buhalis and Neuhofer, 2017; Campos et al., 2018), due to the great impact the service-dominant
logic (SDL) has had on service research and marketing studies. For instance, Vargo et al. (2008; in
Chathoth et al., 2013: 11), while discussing the role of the users in service provision, observed that
“consumer expectations from a shopping trip, restaurant meal, or hotel stay are continuously changing,
and hospitality organisations strive to anticipate and respond to these expectations. However, the ability
to anticipate such changing expectations […] requires a systematic and strategic approach to cooperating
closely with customers”. Therefore, users can play different roles, such as generating content (Hyun et
al., 2009), setting up the experience (Chathoth et al., 2013) or assessing a destination or a provider of
tourism services (Law et al., 2010); most of the studies that explore co-creation in tourism have focused
on the service experience as the outcome of using tourism services, thus recalling the pillars of SDL
(Vargo and Lusch, 2004; 2008), which recognizes the interactions between firms and users as the main
locus of value, with value emerging during use, thus leading to make value-in-use a central topic in this
perspective. Vargo and Lusch fortified their marketing logic as time went by (2008), when modifying
3
the foundations of SDL and adding a new proposition defining value as uniquely and
phenomenologically determined by the beneficiary. Two years later, Heinonen et al. (2010) stressed the
role of customers as controlling value creation, with customer experience occurring in customers’ life.
More recently, Vargo and Lusch (2017) strongly influenced the future of the SDL, converting the
foundational premises into axioms, and calling for additional research into the impact of strategies,
ethics, and big data, among others. Particular attention was paid to experience, as shaping two of the
five axioms. Previously, scholars focused on the context in which the experience occurs (Mehmetoglu
and Normann, 2013; Oliveira and Panyik, 2015). Therefore, value co-creation in SDL emerges as a process
greatly affected by the user’s characteristics, since “value is uniquely and phenomenologically determined
by the beneficiary” (Vargo and Lusch, 2008: 7). Following and furthering this perspective, Helkkula et
al. (2012), introduced the concept of ‘value-in-the-experience’, defined as “individual service customers’
lived experiences of value that extend beyond the current context of service use to also include past and
future experiences and service customers’ broader lifeworld contexts” (Helkkula et al., 2012: 3).
The debate on new value concepts has continued and pollinated several fields of studies with the
proposal of a framework to be implemented, research agendas and a further attention to service
experience (e.g., Chandler and Lusch, 2015). The tourism experience involves many actors, not only
tourists and firms, but also local communities, which can be strongly affected by the presence of the
former (Mason and Cheyne, 2000); e.g., Lin et al. (2017) argued that “the development of tourism may
facilitate incoming investment and business activity in local community, which provides greater
employment opportunity […] but it also contributes to the rise of price of goods, services, land and
property”. Therefore, “residents can also a adopt negative attitude”; Doxey (1975) proposed an index
measuring the irritation of residents of a tourist destination – the Irridex –, stating that “as tourist
number increases, resident populations react with increasing hostility toward tourists, passing through
stages from euphoria to antagonism” (Doxey in Mason and Cheyne, 2000: 392). Hence, as the presence
of tourists can have a significant impact on the local community, the approach of the residents can
considerably modify the tourism experience.
When talking about co-creation and the tourism experience, the digitalization of the services emerges
as one of the most relevant aspects (Neuhofer et al., 2014; Buhalis and Sinarta, 2019). This transformation
of the travel and tourism industries is mainly due to the fast development and diffusion of the ICTs. In
general, both service offerings and delivery are characterized by a digitalization process (Oliveira and
Panyik, 2015), with the goal of improving the overall quality of the experience and service for the
customer, while at the same time reducing the costs of production and delivery as the market becomes
more competitive and efficient (Israel et al., 2019). The active role of tourists, and the participation of
various actors affect the services even during their delivery, since ICTs make the interactions among
stakeholders direct and in real-time, according to the multi-stakeholder perspective adopted by most
of scholars in service marketing studies (e.g. Davcik and Sharma, 2016; Reypens et al., 2016; Prior &
Marco-Cuevas, 2016). Indeed, these studies centered this perspective on the need to stress two pivotal
elements, namely (a) the relevance of resource and knowledge integration from several sources as
leading to competitive advantage (Davcik and Sharma, 2016), and (b) the suitability of such a multi-
actor perspective in achieving innovation (Reypens et al., 2016).
Thus, scholars investigating the multi-stakeholder contexts and the factors affecting the service
experience, consider technology too, since it may affect all the service stages including the experience
itself, e.g., adding to and transforming what we see through augmented reality (Chung et al., 2018). As
concerns the participation of the tourists and the use of mobile devices, innovations have been
introduced in all three phases that shape customer participation, namely joining, consumption and
4
detachment (Lee-Ross and Johns, 2001). The first phase is characterized by the use of new technology
to organize the trip, i.e., gathering information about services, prices and the destination, primarily
through social media (Arenas-Gaitan et al., 2013); the second phase is the core of the experience, as the
tourist moves from a passive role - getting information provided by others – to a mainly active role,
taking part in the social community – providing and sharing information (Parra-López et al., 2011);
finally, after the vacation, the tourist remains a part of the community, offering comments and
suggestions useful to both other travelers and the tourism organizations, thereby participating in the
co-creation of the future offer (Neuhofer et al., 2012).
Consequently, Rayman-Bacchus and Molina (2001: 593) discussed ‘Internet-based tourism services’ and
declared that “Telecommunication developments seem to have sharpened the traveller’s appetite for travel
information. Internet technologies are complementing rather than undermining the role of personal
travel”. In conclusion, technology has empowered tourists, giving them additional opportunities to join
the co-creation process (Binkhorst and Den Dekker, 2009) and also to co-create and enhance their
experiences (Neuhofer et al., 2012); tourists are no longer passive, but have become proactive, viz. actors
that can support and affect the definition and delivery of the value proposition.
Aim & methodology

The goal of this paper is to analyze the extant academic literature on co-creation in the tourism industry
in order to (a) identify the main themes shaping the current debate in this area and (b) to highlight
those emergent themes and issues that should shape further future research. Thereby, the paper
addresses the calls of scholars, such as Eide et al. (2017) who called for additional research to understand
the upcoming effects of co-creation in the tourism industry, namely the identification of the ways in
which customers can shape the experience together with firms including the use of new approaches and
technologies. Similarly, Binkhorst and Den Dekker (2009) called for efforts to shape the future of the
co-creation tourism experience and some advances in this direction were recently made by Duerden et
al. (2015); indeed, they discussed tourism experiences in consumer culture theory and service-dominant
logic to highlight nature, elements, and processes as the main drivers of a structured experience.
To analyze the literature the authors used Bibliometric analysis, considered by some scholars to be one
of the most unbiased methods to discover emerging research trends (Persson et al., 2009). The use of
bibliometric analysis has been considered particularly appropriate when combining different constructs
(Belter, 2017; Strandberg et al., 2018), in this case those of tourism and co-creation. This type of analysis
is performed using different software packages (He, 1999; Leung et al., 2017) and databases. For this
paper both Web of Science and Scopus were used as sources of data, a choice made previously by other
scholars like Torres-Salinas et al. (2009).
To ensure transparency in the data collection process the methodological suggestions by Aguinis et al.
(2018) were followed; therefore, co-keywords analysis using the terms provided by authors rather than
editors was used to analyze the links between key constructs (Callon et al., 1986; Gil Leiva and Alonso
Arroyo, 2007). This approach has been considered preferable among the traditional ways of performing
a bibliometric analysis, that use co-citation, co-words, co-authors and co-keywords provided by editors
(Leydesdorff et al., 2013).
Also, to interpret the extant literature, the methodological suggestions by Aguinis et al. (2018) have
been implemented; thereby (a) one consistent theoretical lens – SDL – has been used by the authors to
interpret the categories emerging from the bibliometric analysis; (b) all contributions have been
5
considered regardless of their methodological approach, leading to a richer dataset; and (c) the use of
two different databases has offered a more complete understanding of the ongoing debate.
The datasets have been built considering papers and book chapters from scientific field linked to
business and published from 2008 to 2018 – the oldest relevant paper found in the search engines - until
the present, drawn from the two databases and using three queries: “co-creation + tourism”, “cocreation
+ tourism” and “co creation + tourism”. The 10-year-time-span also coincides approximately with SDL-
oriented contributions in tourism studies, with the exception of only two papers appeared earlier
(Snepenger et al., 2007; von Friedrichs Grängsjö and Gummesson, 2006).
Next, the three queries were done and results compared to remove duplicates. Journals, chapters, and
books were chosen without discarding any due to rankings considerations; on the other side
proceedings were discarded, since some of them may have evolved into journal papers or book chapters.
Table 1 shows the main features of the data collection process; the number of contributions was almost
the same for both databases, but Web of Science offered a higher percentage of books. Some of the
entries of the two datasets were not considered in the analyses performed, since no authors’ keywords
were provided; also, only entries allowing a co-keyword were considered. A total number of 394 entries
conformed the two original datasets, while the additional criteria used, and the availability of data led
to the final analysis of 295 contributions. Interestingly, 2017 is the year with most of the contributions
(about 30%), but this number does not constitute a foreseeable peak, but rather the beginning of a
trend.
Table 1. Data collection criteria (Authors’ elaboration)

Web of Science - Core
Data selection Scopus
Collection
Method of analysis Bibliometric analysis (Callon et al., 1986)
Typology of analysis Co-keyword analysis on authors’ keywords
co-creation + tourism
Queries “co creation” + tourism
cocreation + tourism
Business & Management
Branches of Science Business finance
Economics
Time span from 2008 to 2018
Software BibExcel (analyses); VosViewer (label view maps)
Total entries 195 (18 proceedings) 199 (19 proceedings)
Dataset: entries with
135 160
authors’ keywords
Year with most Year with most contributions
Data Analysis
contributions (2017): 31,07% (2017): 28,89%
Before starting the analysis of the data using the software, the two datasets were compared to verify to
which extent there were duplicate entries; since the percentage of contributions found in both datasets
was about 41%, the choice of combining analyses on the entries from Web of Science and Scopus was
proven to be useful. The two datasets were analysed using BibExcel (Persson et al., 2009), a software
package endorsed by several scholars (e.g., Jiang et al., 2017; Koseoglu, 2016), due to the options offered
6
by the software. A co-keyword analysis using authors’ keywords was performed, to highlight the ties
among different themes, depict current research trends, and identify opportunities for further research.
Using authors’ keywords allowed for focus upon the intended interpretation of scholars of their own
work; using editors’ keywords has been considered misleading by some scholars (Whittaker, 1989).
The output of the BibExcel analysis was then mapped using the VosViewer software (Leydesdorff et al.,
2013) which provides an easy-to-understand graphical representation of the results in the form of a label
view map. The label view map also highlights the strength of connections among the different research
streams (the bigger spheres represent the strongest ties while the smaller spheres the weakest ones;
finally, terms appearing on their own are not linked at all to the other emerging topics). The objective
and unbiased graphical outcome of this analysis was then interpreted as a whole by the authors, in line
with the methodological guidelines offered by Aguinis et al. (2018) cited above.
Findings
The analysis conducted with the help of BibExcel and VosViewer using datasets from Web of Science
and Scopus shows the emergence of four main clusters in the academic literature (see Figure 1)
according to Web of Science and three main clusters according to Scopus. The papers present in the
different clusters were then further examined to clarify conceptual distinctions between the emerging
perspectives.
In the next sub-sections, the findings are summarized using five perspectives related to the core
construct of ‘tourism experience’, since it emerged as a key topic in all clusters.
Web of Science Dataset

First, we present a brief overview on the dataset resulting from the queries on Web of Science; 177 entries
shape this dataset with 40 book chapters and 137 papers from scientific journals. The contributions
considered showed a huge increase in the academic debate, since 25 out of 177 have been published
from 2008 to 2013, while the remaining 152 – namely, almost 86% – from 2014 on. Additionally, Table 2
shows the most relevant links from the bibliometric analysis, based on the coupling performed through
BibExcel.
Table 2. Coupling among topics and link strength
Figure 1 shows the main themes and constructs shaping the four clusters; the bigger spheres describe
the core of each cluster, while the relevance of the thematic ties declines when considering the smaller
spheres. Further, the font-size of the words represents the degree of relevance they have in each cluster.
7
Figure 1. Label view map on the dataset from Web of Science

(Authors’ elaboration through VosViewer)
Four main clusters – represented in the squared boxes in figure 2 – emerge from the analysis of the
literature, the first, co-creation, embeds two of the remaining three, namely tourism, and innovation,
while the fourth is customer participation and loyalty. The clusters are related to two main perspectives,
innovation-based and customer satisfaction and participation – represented in the circles in figure 2 –
that will be discussed further below. The clusters analysed should be thought of as linked to each other
and as contributing to more than one single perspective; thus, the four clusters should not be thought
as “watertight boxes”, and also considering that the aim of this paper is not to categorize contributions
but research interests.
The authors identified two perspectives (as shown in Figure 2) based on the co-creation cluster;
additionally, one of the perspectives integrates two other clusters based on tourism and innovation
(named Innovation-based tourism experiences), while the second one focuses on the cluster based on
customer participation, customer satisfaction and loyalty (named Customer satisfaction and
participation in tourism experiences).
8
Co-creation studies
Innovation Innovation-
based tourism
experiences
Tourism
Customer
satisfaction
Customer
and
participation
participation
and loyalty
in tourism
Figure 2. Clusters and perspectives on the dataset from Web of Science

(Authors’ elaboration)
Innovation-based tourism experiences

As anticipated, the first perspective includes contributions focused on innovation and experience, as
the main elements describing the changes derived from co-creation in tourism using technology. The
interactions among these constructs combined with others such as loyalty, culture, creativity, and co-
production, confirm the recent transformation of the role played by the tourists. For instance, according
to Kelly et al. (2017), tourists are no longer passive but have become active participants in the design of
services; as co-creators and co-innovators of the experience throughout the entire value chain, from
design to end use.
Hence, the tourism experience is increasingly co-created by users, and its effects take place in a context
influenced by acquaintances of these users; for instance, research on generations X and Y shows that
online social networks affect both the needs of the users and the service experience itself (Guerra et al.,
2015), while Yoo and Gretzel (2016) consider experiences as the effect of customers’ participation in
technology-empowered processes. These processes now include the experience itself, since the core of
traditional tourism activities does not suffice to fully encompass an experience.
Using a different perspective, namely a focus on providers, Chen et al. (2017) explore the relations
between travel agents and their suppliers through a co-creation perspective. Their analysis highlights
the importance of technology as an antecedent of service innovation, even if only through an indirect
influence; the key influence has been found to be relationships mediated by technologies with several
value co-creators when new value propositions were developed (Buonincontri et al., 2017). The
importance of technology has also been highlighted by other scholars who advocated the use of RFID
technologies, mobile applications and their integration in service offerings as a crucial element leading
to value co-creation, due to the empowered role of customers (Cobos et al., 2016).
9
The effect of innovation is considered as disruptive by Hsu et al. (2016) when investigating the new
factors in business-to-business relationships mediated by technologies. In this case, innovation is
considered a source of competitive advantage since companies can join “a reduction in operational costs
and an increase in productivity, access to more customer segments, and increased customer satisfaction
and loyalty” (Kelly et al., 2017); moreover, the recent changes are considered as anticipated
(Kandampully et al., 2016), thus as reinforcing the leadership of a firm when competing. To sum up,
innovation permeates both the process of service delivery and the value outcome, i.e., the tourism
experience.
Customer satisfaction and participation in the tourism experience

The second perspective is shown in the left section of the label view map (see Figure 1 above); in this
area, the customer plays a central role, since customer satisfaction, customer participation, and
involvement emerge as the most relevant topics, since co-creation and tourism are closely related
through customer involvement.
Chathoth et al. (2016) consider customer satisfaction and customer participation as key goals of
customer engagement; indeed, a company’s support to customers significantly affects the degree of
customer co-creation, while the degree of co-creation positively affects customer satisfaction and
thereby increases use of the services.
Content generated by users and other actors tied to the firm affects brand perception and brand
awareness. Tourist participation in value co-creation processes leads to an increase in the awareness of
a destination brand (Frías-Jamilena et al., 2017). This effect is stronger when tourist efforts are partnered
with other actors’ contributions (Mazurek, 2015). Social media increase the number of actors that need
to be considered in co-creation processes as they increase both the willingness and the opportunities to
participate in co-creation (Sigala, 2016). Participation of tourists through sharing platforms does not
only impact the tourists willing to share their experience, but the broader user needs for comfort,
security, general information, and exchange of experiences which are all crucial in shaping the
experience and lead to customer satisfaction. Today, the tourism experience begins even before the core
service is delivered, having led scholars to introduce the concept of experience design in tourism
(Duerden et al., 2018; Tussyadiah, 2014): customers join the process early and, more importantly, the
relevance of the human element has in no way decreased despite the central role played by technologies
in tourism experiences.
The findings suggest that technology leads the path towards a technology-based value co-creation in
tourism, due to the participation of customers and the opportunities for contributions offered by online
communities. Therefore, users take part in value co-creation processes in different ways through
knowledge sharing and recombination, self-customization of value propositions, and the co-
construction of the service context together with the firm or the destination.
In conclusion, scholars emphasize the core role of technology in today’s tourism experience and its
impact on co-creation, which requires further research (Neuhofer et al., 2012). This new approach to
tourism studies encompasses both time and space, since co-creation takes place starting before the use
of tourism services until after using them, with technologies and innovative processes also helping to
overcome spatial barriers. This has led to multi-actor initiatives affecting the tourist experience
(Oliveira and Panyik, 2015); therefore, firms should introduce co-creative modalities for their offerings
favouring a careful management of customer experiences (Chathoth et al., 2016).
10
Table 3 highlights the main findings of this section based on contributions from Web of Science. The
four clusters of literature shape two perspectives describing the tourism experience. The tourism
experience is depicted as related to innovation, since co-design and the contribution of multiple actors
through technologies are offering change to have new and creative solutions to be transformed into
value propositions and into experiences. The second perspective relates to customer satisfaction and
participation and depends on the engagement of several actors – first and foremost customers – to co-
creative processes leading to new contents, thereby setting the ground for higher levels of satisfaction,
due to the links between participation and satisfaction.
Table 3. Summary of the three perspectives emerging from contributions in Web of Science
WOS Dataset
Co-creation
Clusters Customer participation and loyalty
Innovation Tourism
Customer satisfaction and participation
Perspectives Innovation-based tourism experiences
in the tourism experience
Most Yoo and Gretzel (2016) Chathoth et al. (2016)
representative Chen et al. (2017) Sigala (2016)
contributions Kelly et al. (2017) Frías-Jamilena et al. (2017)
Most Service co-design Customer engagement
representative Technology-empowered processes User-generated content
themes Creativity Multi-actor participation
Scopus Dataset
Before starting the analysis, a brief overview of the dataset resulting from the queries on Scopus is
offered; 180 contributions are included in this dataset with 39 book chapters and 141 papers from
scientific journals. The entries considered show a significant increase in the academic debate – as
already witnessed from the dataset achieved from Web of Science –, since 38 out of 180 were published
before 2013, while the remaining 142 – namely, almost 79% – from 2014 to 2018. Also, Table 4 shows the
topics leading to the most relevant links from the bibliometric analysis, based on the coupling
performed through BibExcel.
Table 4. Coupling among topics and link strength
11
Figure 3. Label view map on the dataset from Scopus

(Authors’ elaboration through VosViewer)
Four clusters emerge from the analysis of the Scopus database (Figure 3): co-creation, cultural-based
experience in tourism, service-dominant logic and value co-creation - represented in the squared boxes
in figure 4 - which are integrated into three main perspectives based on the tourism experience: firm-
inspired experience, technology-based experience and cultural-based experience represented in the circles
in figure 4.
Firm-inspired tourism experiences

The first perspective analysed is based on the cluster of co-creation linked to constructs such as
destination branding, relationship marketing, consensus seeking, strategic reflexivity, innovation and
sustainability; the combination of themes and constructs leads to the configuration of the role of firms
in experience building (see Figure 2), highlighting how companies involved in tourism initiatives pay
attention to the definition of the offer through the employment of technological tools and innovative
processes.
It is important to underline that this perspective is not just focused on the management of customer
role, but also involves all the actors participating in the construction of the tourism experience with the
support of technology. In this regard, Malone et al. (2018) highlight that when scholars discuss the
configuration of tourism initiatives, they tend to focus on the firm rather than on the customer
perspective; the authors discuss how consumers’ emotions, and antecedents influence the process of
value creation. Likewise, Chathoth et al. (2014) underline the importance of an overall strategy involving
12
the whole structure of the company as well as its culture and vision in developing customer engagement
and designing the tourist experience, through the example of hotel organizations. A similar approach
is adopted by Chim-Miki et al. (2017) who recall C2B2C (consumer-to-business-to-consumer) theory
when discussing the role of collaborative network organization in the co-creation of value in tourism.
Several scholars (Olsson, 2013; Rahmani et al., 2017; Tung and Au, 2018; Wu et al., 2018) describe the role
of customers in marketing research, which is key to observe tourism initiatives impact, and to design
the offer and destination branding. Also, Prebensen et al. (2013), use the findings of a survey filled out
by 505 consumers, to show that the value of personal service, the surrounding natural environment and
the behaviour of other tourists are the factors that mainly affect service quality. The support offered by
new technologies is stressed by Tiago et al. (2017) who focus on the relevance on new technologies in
developing innovative forms of communication and co-creation with customers. Similarly, Cimbaljevic
et al. (2018) and Israel et al. (2019) state that a wider application of ICTs in tourism contributes to the
achievement of destination competitiveness.
Co-creation
Cultural-
Firm-inspired based
Cultural-based tourism tourism
Tourism experience experience
Service-
Technology-based
dominant logic participatory
tourism
experience
Value co-creation
Figure 4. Clusters and perspectives on the dataset from Scopus (Authors’ elaboration)
Technology-based participatory tourism experiences

The second perspective integrates the two main clusters in the left section of the label view map (see
Figure 2 above), namely the one related to service-dominant logic and the other to value co-creation.
This perspective includes constructs linked to the involvement and the engagement of customers
through social media and innovative tools, aimed at improving satisfaction and loyalty through the co-
creation of value.
For instance, Blazquez-Resino et al. (2015: 1) find that “tourist loyalty is achieved through the
development of relationship quality in the co-creation of tourist experience”; Tsai (2017), stresses the
linkage between innovation and consumers’ loyalty, recalling the holistic innovation paradigm, as new
technological tools are essential in initiatives based on consumer participation in tourism initiatives.
Indeed, when looking at the figure above, constructs such as community-based events, social media, e-
tourism, and service innovation appear, showing how important ICTs are to the interactions among the
different stakeholders of the tourism industry. In this regard, Kim et al. (2018) mention the tourist
13
attraction's owners, managers, and tourism researchers, as well as current and potential visitors, who
are important actors able to contribute to the re-branding process of a destination through a co-creative
approach. The destination branding strategy is also discussed by Oliveira and Panyik (2015), who define
content generated by tourists, travel journalists, bloggers and professionals and shared through social
media and apps, the greatest digital challenge of destination branding today. According to these
authors, tourist-generated content can effectively increase the brand value of destinations rather than
of firms. The relevance of new technologies and mobile devices is also underlined by Buhalis and Foerste
(2015) and enforced by a focus on C2C co-creation practices by Rihova et al. (2018), since through their
own mobile devices, multiple users can join the co-creation context and combine information belonging
to different sources and create their individual profile to shape and join a personalized tourism
experience.
As concerns the role of communities, Bertella (2015) and Bertella et al. (2018) analyze the importance of
emotions and emotional ties in community-based experiences. Lin et al. (2018) discuss the role of tourist
communities in the renewal of areas affected by disasters, thanks to a process they call co-creational
ethos able to transform negative labels associated with dark tourism into motivation to re-shape local
image and improve the quality of life of citizens.
Cultural-based tourism experiences

The last perspective analysed refers to new forms of tourism, with special reference to the tourism
experience related to cultural heritage and creativity. According to Jovicic (2016), cultural tourism is a
form of tourism promoted as an alternative to mass tourism. Instead of joining passively the experience,
cultural tourists show a proactive approach and participate in the co-creation of high-quality
experiences.
Boukas et al. (2017), focus on the role of museums in creating a holistic memorable experience for the
visitors and enhancing the image of the destination. In addition, Chugh (2018) describes cultural
heritage as an element upon which forms of creative tourism can be based through a co-creative
approach. This kind of tourism is strictly related to the engagement of customers, indeed, the degree of
willingness to participate in tourism initiatives represents the key to define a satisfying experience. The
connection between creative tourism and cultural heritage is also described by Ross et al. (2017). In their
paper, creativity in tourism adopts a different meaning, namely the virtual recreation of inaccessible or
destroyed sites, to facilitate creative tourism experiences using new technologies. Finally, Smed et al.
(2016) discuss the relationship between cultural heritage and creativity in tourism through the case
study of a Danish Viking site where tourists can experience everyday life in the past interacting with
Viking storytellers, and thereby achieving the co-creation of the experience as well as the co-creation of
value.
As concerns the co-creation of value through creative tourism initiatives, Richards et al. (2014) underline
the relevance of creative imagination in event design and planning process, while Marques and Borba
(2017) discuss the case of Recife, Brazil which they call a “playable city”, a new form of city developed
according to a co-creative approach and through concrete projects to face the challenge of reconciling
the needs of residents and tourists with the support of new technologies.
Table 5 summarizes the findings of this section; four literature clusters contribute to three perspectives
describing the tourism experience. This concept depends on several contributions and themes. The
most relevant ones are highlighted below, albeit the effects of other themes should not be though as
being irrelevant. The firm-inspired tourism experience is more oriented to what organizations do to
14
define a value proposition for tourists and for the actors contributing to such an offering. On the other
side, a cultural-based tourism experience is found in different contexts and creativity is more relevant
than in other perspectives, primarily because of the nature of cultural heritage-based activities. Finally,
the technology-based tourism experience describes how technologies are providing new opportunities
to shape services through the support of multiple actors, even in an online context.
Table 5. Summary of the three perspectives emerging from contributions in Scopus

Scopus Dataset
Service-dominant logic
Cultural-based
Clusters Co-creation
Tourism
Value co-creation
Technology-based
Firm-inspired tourism Cultural-based tourism
Perspectives participatory tourism
experience experience
experience
Most Buhalis and Foerste
Prebensen et al. (2013) Jovicic (2016)
representative (2015)
Chim-Miki et al. (2017) Ross et al. (2017)
contributions Rihova et al. (2015)
Israel et al. (2019) Chugh (2018)
Tsai (2017)
Most Mobile-mediated
Service quality
representative Cultural heritage services
Collaborative network
themes Creative tourism e-tourism and online
Destination
Alternative tourism communities
competitiveness
content sharing
Discussion and implications

The analysis of the five perspectives emerging from the co-keywords is clustered around tourism
experience as the key construct; this is due to the impact of SDL during the last decade, and to an
understanding of experience as a new way of addressing value co-creation processes and value outcomes
for customers (Vargo et al., 2008). Tourism experiences are identified as the result of dynamic co-
creation through knowledge integration (Buhalis and Foerste, 2015) and as the essence of value co-
creation along the entire set of processes in which tourists and firms interact (Chathoth et al., 2016).
SDL permeates the debate on tourism experiences when dealing with co-created experiences, namely
the customization of a tourism service and its outcome, depending on the contributions of several actors
(Bryce et al., 2017). Unfortunately, the co-creation of experiences can also lead to undesired effects, as
discussed by Murdy et al. (2016), when role conflicts affect the expected outcome of customization, due
to a misalignment of either actors’ behaviour or the resources required to achieve co-creation.
The comparison of the five perspectives shows both similarities and contrasts; first, both the innovation-
based tourism experience and the firm-based tourism experience stress soft skills as leading to the co-
creation of tourism experiences. Indeed, creativity, emotions, and firms’ culture are the levers for the
achievement of co-created service experiences (Chathoth et al., 2014; Malone et al., 2018). Tourists are
playing a different role than in the past, and firms are offering a fertile ground for the co-design of
tourism experiences. This may lead to value propositions with a higher level of quality than before
(Prebensen et al., 2013) and to opportunities to improve firm competitiveness (Cimbaljevic et al., 2018).
These effects can be achieved in contexts embedding innovation as a philosophy. Thus, the intangible
skills discussed above, the co-design of tourism experiences, and the co-creation of value propositions
15
should all be oriented toward an innovation-based approach. Innovation in the tourism industry is also
achieved through technology, and is reshaping B2C and also B2B relationships (Aznar et al., 2019).
Technology favours these changes as it contributes to the diffusion of innovation and allows for new
ways to perform core operations. Firms that embrace technology are more willing and able to encourage
co-created experiences leading to better outcomes for tourists, higher competitiveness for firms, and
multiple co-creation opportunities.
Both the customer satisfaction and participation and the technology-based participatory experience
perspectives consider engagement as a key factor to increase the tourists’ participation in the co-
creation processes. This participation is encouraged and favoured by the new technologies, and found
in contexts and relationships mediated by technologies (Mehmetoglu and Normann, 2013; Eide et al.,
2017; Sigala, 2016). Social media, online platforms, sharing practices, and user-generated content are the
most relevant instruments and results of these co-creative processes leading to customized and more
satisfying experiences (Kim et al., 2018; Yoo and Gretzel, 2016). Additionally, the shaping of new
experiences is based on the participation of multiple actors, other than the ones framing the traditional
B2C relationships; indeed, technology-driven multi-stakeholder (Prior and Marco-Cuevas, 2016; Viglia
et al., 2018) contexts are thought of as the best environments to increase participation and satisfaction
and leading to co-created tourism experiences (Chugh, 2018; Tsai, 2017). Customization, the uniqueness
of the value outcomes, the actor-to-actor approach – instead of a B2C approach – and the high level of
participation favoured by involvement and engagement practices are the drivers of co-created tourist
experiences, in line with the SDL approach adopted by scholars and discussed in this paper (Heinonen,
2018; Aznar et al., 2019).
But not all five perspectives converge, and key differences emerge when they are contrasted. For
instance, cultural-based experiences appear to be distinct. Creativity, one of their key features is an
innate skill (Smed et al., 2016), higher levels of tourist participation already exist (Jovicic, 2016), and
quality is a core feature embedded in cultural tourism contexts (Boukas et al., 2017). Therefore, tourists
opting for cultural-based tourism are already familiar with a co-creation approach centred on
knowledge sharing, quality, and the participation encouraged by the challenge of high-quality tourism
experiences.
In brief terms, this study offers a clustering of the literature on co-creation in tourism of the last 10 years
into five perspectives framed by the constructs of innovation, customer satisfaction and participation,
firm support, technology, and cultural services. These perspectives are further analysed and synthesized
to better understand the impact of co-creation on the tourism industry as well as its importance in the
research agenda proposed by Eide et al. (2017). Also, the focus on tourism experience addresses the call
for research by Binkhorst and Den Dekker (2009) and the recent findings of Duerden et al. (2018). The
commonalities among the perspectives lead to consider tourism experiences as dynamically co-created
through a participatory, involved, and engaging processes by multiple actors using innovative and
technology-based value propositions. Such processes aim at the increase of value as an outcome, of
quality as a driver of loyalty, and of the competitiveness of the tourism industry.
To sum up, three conceptual pillars emerge from the analysis of co-creation and tourism in the
literature, co-creation itself, the tourist experience, and technology: the first as the engine enabling the
interaction through a multi-actor approach to improve customers’ experience and transferring
consumers’ feedback to adjust the offer when is needed; the second as the outcome of the co-creative
process; and the last one as the tool to co-create satisfying experiences for the tourist (Figure 5).
16
Interaction through a multi-actor approach supported by ICTs can

improve customers’ experience
Multi-actor Co-creation TECHNOLOGY Tourism Experience
Consumers’ feedback helps the firm in improving the offer
Figure 5. Conceptual pillars emerging from the analysis of co-creation and tourism
(Authors’ elaboration)
Conclusion
This study analyzes the extant literature on co-creation in tourism. The findings show that besides the
use of tourism services, co-production and co-innovation arise as two new ways to depict how tourists
interact with firms. The same applies to other key stakeholders of the industry, such as local
communities, other firms, and local governmental agencies. Therefore, the co-creation process emerges
as not only pertinent to the business-to-business (B2B) or business-to-consumer (B2C) perspectives,
but fundamentally as a multi-actor process based on engagement, and leading to innovation and the
enabling of new tourist experiences (C2B2C theory). The interest in framing tourist studies in a co-
creation framework is reflected in contributions of the last five years, that discuss many linkages among
common topics in tourism studies and service-dominant logic, such as engagement, participation,
innovation, service experience, and the role of technologies.
The analysis of the extant literature suggests the need to further research the factors affecting co-
creation processes, including the viability of a continuously evolving context, guidelines to manage
multi-stakeholder relationships, and an increasing level of real-time interactions. Also, a clustering of
potential tourists based on their degree of participation, involvement, and engagement, and an
evaluation of the out-of-control variables in social media represent areas to be further investigated in
order to offer a more complete understanding of the value co-creation processes in the tourism industry.
Further, a systematic review of the emerging empirical evidence should complement theory-based
analysis, describing how technology and online contexts are favouring actors’ engagement and the
emergence of new initiatives. Also, new insights may emerge from the analysis focused on technologies
and their effects on multi-actor interactions, since currently few studies are proposing concrete insights
about the outcomes of technology-oriented co-created processes in tourism.
Finally, to widen the scope of bibliometric research in this field, the authors suggest to replicate the co-
keyword analysis contrasting and/or combining the findings obtained using the authors’ and the
editors’ keywords, while keeping the same methodological approach to reinforce the validity of the
17
results obtained. It should be pointed out that the main limitation of this study relates to the limited
number of scholarly contributions, due to the criteria used to collect the data and to the fact that studies
focusing on co-creation in tourism only started appearing in the literature some ten years ago. Further,
there is no single database that encompasses all the extant scholarly literature on co-creation and
tourism. Still, most of the relevant contributions are included in this study. Nevertheless, the future
integration of databases would lead to a more complete overview and analysis of the themes discussed
in this paper.
References
Aguinis, H., Ramani, R. S., & Alabduljader, N. (2018). What you see is what you get? Enhancing
methodological transparency in management research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 83-
110.
Altinay, L., Sigala, M., & Waligo, V. (2016). Social value creation through tourism enterprise. Tourism
Arenas-Gaitan, J., Javier Rondan-Cataluña, F., & Esteban Ramírez-Correa, P. (2013). Social identity,
electronic word-of-mouth and referrals in social network services. Kybernetes, 42(8), 1149-1165.
Aznar, J., Maspera, J., & Quer, X. (2019). A Game Theory approach to Airbnb and hotels competition.
European Journal of Tourism Research, 21, 119-123.
Belter, C. W. (2017). A relevance ranking method for citation-based search results. Scientometrics, 112(2),
731-746.
Bertella, G. (2015). Celebrating the family abroad: the wedding tourism experience. Annals of Leisure
Research, 18(3), 397-413.
Bertella, G., Cavicchi, A., & Bentini, T. (2018). The reciprocal aspect of the experience value: tourists and
residents celebrating weddings in the rural village of Petritoli (Italy). Anatolia, 29(1), 52-62.
Binkhorst, E., & Den Dekker, T. (2009). Agenda for co-creation tourism experience research. Journal of
Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2-3), 311-327.
Blazquez-Resino, J. J., Molina, A., & Esteban-Talaya, A. (2015). Service-Dominant Logic in tourism: the
way to loyalty. Current issues in Tourism, 18(8), 706-724.
Boukas, N., Ioannou, M., & Sourouklis, C. (2017). Investigating islands' visitor experiences in cultural
heritage museums: the case of Cyprus. International Journal of Tourism Policy, 7(4), 327-351.
Bryce, D., Murdy, S., & Alexander, M. (2017). Diaspora, authenticity and the imagined past. Annals of
Buhalis, D., & Foerste, M. (2015). SoCoMo marketing for travel and tourism: Empowering co-creation of
value. Journal of destination marketing & management, 4(3), 151-161.
Buhalis, D., & Neuhofer, B. (2017). Service-dominant logic in the social media landscape: New
perspectives on experience and value co-creation. In Sigala & Gretzel (Eds.) Advances in Social Media
for Travel, Tourism and Hospitality (pp. 13-25). Routledge.
Buhalis, D., & Sinarta, Y. (2019). Real-time co-creation and nowness service: lessons from tourism and
hospitality. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 36(5), 563-582.
Buonincontri, P., Morvillo, A., Okumus, F., & van Niekerk, M. (2017). Managing the experience co-
creation process in tourism destinations: Empirical findings from Naples. Tourism Management, 62,
264-277.
Callon, M., Law, J., and Rip, A. (Eds.). (1986). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology: Sociology
of science and the real world. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
Campos, A. C., Mendes, J., Valle, P. O. D., & Scott, N. (2018). Co-creation of tourist experiences: A
literature review. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(4), 369-400.
18
Chandler, J. D., & Lusch, R. F. (2015). Service systems: a broadened framework and research agenda on
value propositions, engagement, and service experience. Journal of Service Research, 18(1), 6-22.
Chathoth, P. K., Altinay, L., Harrington, R. J., Okumus, F., & Chan, E. S. (2013). Co-production versus
co-creation: A process based continuum in the hotel service context. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 32, 11-20.
Chathoth, P. K., Ungson, G. R., Altinay, L., Chan, E. S., Harrington, R., & Okumus, F. (2014). Barriers
affecting organisational adoption of higher order customer engagement in tourism service
interactions. Tourism Management, 42, 181-193.
Chathoth, P. K., Ungson, G. R., Harrington, R. J., & Chan, E. S. (2016). Co-creation and higher order
customer engagement in hospitality and tourism services: A critical review. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(2), 222-245.
Chen, J. S., Kerr, D., Chou, C. Y., & Ang, C. (2017). Business co-creation for service innovation in the
hospitality and tourism industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
29(6), 1522-1540.
Chim-Miki, A. F., Gândara, J. M., & Batista-Canino, R. M. (2017). Collaborative network organisations as
platform for value co-creation in tourism destinations: an analysis of Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil.
International Journal of Tourism Policy, 7(1), 42-57.
Chugh, S. R. (2018). Creative Tourism: An Endogenous Approach to Developing Culturally and
Environmentally Sustainable Tourism. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Systems, 11(1).
Chung, N., Lee, H., Kim, J. Y., & Koo, C. (2018). The role of augmented reality for experience-influenced
environments: the case of cultural heritage tourism in Korea. Journal of Travel Research, 57(5), 627-
643.
Cimbaljević, M., Stankov, U., & Pavluković, V. (2018). Going beyond the traditional destination
competitiveness–reflections on a smart destination in the current research. Current Issues in
Tourism, 1-6.
Cobos, L. M., Mejia, C., Ozturk, A. B., & Wang, Y. (2016). A technology adoption and implementation
process in an independent hotel chain. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 57, 93-105.
Cohen, S. A., Prayag, G., & Moital, M. (2014). Consumer behaviour in tourism: Concepts, influences and
opportunities. Current issues in Tourism, 17(10), 872-909.
Davcik, N. S., & Sharma, P. (2016). Marketing resources, performance, and competitive advantage: A
review and future research directions. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5547-5552.
Doxey, G. V. (1975). A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants: Methodology and research
inferences. In Travel and tourism research associations sixth annual conference proceedings (195-198).
Duerden, M. D., Lundberg, N. R., Ward, P., Taniguchi, S. T., Hill, B., Widmer, M. A., & Zabriskie, R.
(2018). From ordinary to extraordinary: A framework of experience types. Journal of Leisure Research,
49(3-5), 196-216.
Duerden, M. D., Ward, P. J., & Freeman, P. A. (2015). Conceptualizing structured experiences: Seeking
interdisciplinary integration. Journal of Leisure Research, 47(5), 601-620.
Eide, D., Fuglsang, L., & Sundbo, J. (2017). Management challenges with the maintenance of tourism
experience concept innovations: Toward a new research agenda. Tourism Management, 63, 452-463.
Frías-Jamilena, D. M., Polo Pena, A. I., & Rodriguez Molina, M. A. (2017). The effect of value-creation on
consumer-based destination brand equity. Journal of Travel Research, 56(8), 1011-1031
Fuentes-Blasco, M., Moliner-Velázquez, B., & Gil-Saura, I. (2017). Exploring relationship variables and
Information and Communication Technologies use in industrial segmentation. Management
Decision, 55(7), 1441-1459.
Gil‐Leiva, I., & Alonso‐Arroyo, A. (2007). Keywords given by authors of scientific articles in database
descriptors. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 58(8), 1175-1187.
19
Guerra, A., Gosling, M., & Carvalho, T. (2015). Social networks and generations X and Y: dissemination
and tourism experience sharing. Rosa dos Ventos, 7(2), 302-315.
He, Q. (1999). Knowledge Discovery Through Co-Word Analysis. Library trends, 48(1), 133-59.
Heinonen, K., Jaakkola, E. and Neganova, I. (2018), Drivers, types and value outcomes of customer-to-
customer interaction: An integrative review and research agenda, Journal of Service Theory and
Practice, 28(6), 710–732.
Heinonen, K., Strandvik, T., Mickelsson, K. J., Edvardsson, B., Sundström, E., & Andersson, P. (2010). A
customer-dominant logic of service. Journal of Service Management, 21(4), 531-548.
Helkkula, A., Kelleher, C., & Pihlström, M. (2012). Characterizing value as an experience: implications
for service researchers and managers. Journal of Service Research, 15(1), 59-75.
Högberg, K., & Olsson, A. K. (2018). Linking Technological Frames to Social Media Implementation—
An International Study of Hotels. In Högberg, & Olsson (Eds.) Information and Communication
Technologies in Tourism 2018 (270-282). Springer, Cham.
Hsu, A. Y. C., King, B., Wang, D., & Buhalis, D. (2016). In-destination tour products and the disrupted
tourism industry: progress and prospects. Information Technology & Tourism, 16(4), 413-433.
Hyun, M. Y., Lee, S., & Hu, C. (2009). Mobile-mediated virtual experience in tourism: concept, typology
and applications. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 15(2), 149-164.
Israel, K., Tscheulin, D., & Zerres, C. (2019). Virtual reality in the hotel industry: assessing the acceptance
of immersive hotel presentation. European Journal of Tourism Research, 21, 5-22.
Ivanov, S. H. (2019). Ultimate transformation: How will automation technologies disrupt the travel,
tourism and hospitality industries? Zeitschrift für Tourismuswissenschaft, 11(1), 25-43.
Ivanov, S. H., & Webster, C. (2018). Adoption of robots, artificial intelligence and service automation by
travel, tourism and hospitality companies: a cost-benefit analysis. In Marinov et al. (Eds.) Traditions
and Innovations in Contemporary Tourism. Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne,
pp. 190-203.
Ivanov, S. H., Gretzel, U., Berezina, K., Sigala, M., & Webster, C. (2019). Progress on robotics in
hospitality and tourism: a review of the literature. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology,
online first.
Jiang, Y., Ritchie, B. W., & Benckendorff, P. (2017). Bibliometric visualisation: an application in tourism
crisis and disaster management research. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-33.
Jovicic, D. (2016). Cultural tourism in the context of relations between mass and alternative tourism.
Current Issues in Tourism, 19(6), 605-612.
Kamboj, S., & Rahman, Z. (2017). Measuring customer social participation in online travel communities:
Scale development and validation. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 8(3), 432-464.
Kandampully, J., Bilgihan, A., & Zhang, T. C. (2016). Developing a people-technology hybrids model to
unleash innovation and creativity: The new hospitality frontier. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Kelly, P., Lawlor, J., & Mulvey, M. (2017). Customer roles in self-service technology encounters in a
tourism context. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 34(2), 222-238.
Kim, H., Stepchenkova, S., & Babalou, V. (2018). Branding destination co-creatively: A case study of
tourists' involvement in the naming of a local attraction. Tourism management perspectives, 28, 189-
200.
Koseoglu, M. A. (2016). Mapping the institutional collaboration network of strategic management
research: 1980–2014. Scientometrics, 109(1), 203-226.
Law, R., Qi, S., & Buhalis, D. (2010). Progress in tourism management: A review of website evaluation in
tourism research. Tourism management, 31(3), 297-313.
Lee-Ross, D., & Johns, N. (2001). Globalisation, total quality management and service in tourism
destination organisations. Tourism in the Age of Globalisation, 10, 242-257.
20
Leung, X. Y., Sun, J., & Bai, B. (2017). Bibliometrics of social media research: A co-citation and co-word
analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 66, 35-45.
Leydesdorff, L., Carley, S., & Rafols, I. (2013). Global maps of science based on the new Web-of-Science
categories. Scientometrics, 94(2), 589-593.
Li, X. R. (2014). Linking service-dominant logic to destination marketing. In The Routledge Handbook
of Tourism Marketing (37-48). Routledge.
Lin, Y., Kelemen, M., & Tresidder, R. (2018). Post-disaster tourism: building resilience through
community-led approaches in the aftermath of the 2011 disasters in Japan. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 1-18.
Lin, Z., Chen, Y., & Filieri, R. (2017). Resident-tourist value co-creation: The role of residents' perceived
tourism impacts and life satisfaction. Tourism Management, 61, 436-442.
Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2014). The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions.
Routledge.
Malone, S., McKechnie, S., & Tynan, C. (2018). Tourists’ emotions as a resource for customer value
creation, cocreation, and destruction: A customer-grounded understanding. Journal of Travel
Research, 57(7), 843-855.
Marques, L., & Borba, C. (2017). Co-creating the city: Digital technology and creative tourism. Tourism
Management Perspectives, 24, 86-93.
Mason, P., & Cheyne, J. (2000). Residents’ attitudes to proposed tourism development. Annals of tourism
research, 27(2), 391-411.
Mazurek, M. (2015). The Emotional Attachment Built through the Attitudes and Managerial Approach
to Place Marketing and Branding– “The Golden City of Kremnica, Slovakia”. In Correia et al. (Eds.)
Marketing Places and Spaces (pp. 93-105). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
McComb, E. J., Boyd, S., & Boluk, K. (2017). Stakeholder collaboration: A means to the success of rural
tourism destinations? A critical evaluation of the existence of stakeholder collaboration within the
Mournes, Northern Ireland. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 17(3), 286-297.
Mehmetoglu, M., & Normann, Ø. (2013). What influences tourists' overall holiday experience? Tourism
company products versus destination products. European Journal of Tourism Research, 6(2), 183-191.
Molz, J. G. (2012). Travel connections: Tourism, technology and togetherness in a mobile world.
Routledge.
Murdy, S., Alexander, M., & Bryce, D. (2016). Role conflict and changing heritage practice: ancestral
tourism in Scotland. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(15-16), 1494-1512.
Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2012). Conceptualising technology enhanced destination
experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 1(1-2), 36-46.
Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2014). A typology of technology‐enhanced tourism experiences.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 16(4), 340-350.
Oliveira, E., & Panyik, E. (2015). Content, context and co-creation. Digital challenges in destination
branding with references to Portugal as a tourist destination. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 21(1),
53-74.
Olsson, A. K. (2013). Members in Tourism Settings – Their Motivations, Behaviours and Roles.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 13(1), 82-83.
Parra-López, E., Bulchand-Gidumal, J., Gutiérrez-Taño, D., & Díaz-Armas, R. (2011). Intentions to use
social media in organizing and taking vacation trips. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 640-654.
Persson, O., Danell, R., & Schneider, J. W. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric
analysis. Celebrating scholarly communication studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th
Birthday, 5, 9-24.
Prebensen, N. K., & Xie, J. (2017). Efficacy of co-creation and mastering on perceived value and
satisfaction in tourists' consumption. Tourism Management, 60, 166-176.
21
Prebensen, N. K., Vittersø, J., & Dahl, T. I. (2013). Value co-creation significance of tourist resources.
Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 240-261.
Prior, D.D. and Marcos-Cuevas, J. (2016), “Value co-destruction in interfirm relationships: The impact
of actor engagement styles”, Marketing Theory, SAGE Publications, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 533–552.
Pulido-Fernández, J. I., & Rodríguez-Díaz, B. (2016). Reinterpreting the World Economic Forum's global
tourism competitiveness index. Tourism Management Perspectives, 20, 131-140.
Rahmani, K., Gnoth, J., & Mather, D. (2017). Tourists’ Participation on Web 2.0: A Corpus Linguistic
Analysis of Experiences. Journal of Travel Research, 57(8), 999-1011.
Rayman-Bacchus, L., & Molina, A. (2001). Internet-based tourism services: business issues and trends.
Futures, 33(7), 589-605.
Reypens, C., Lievens, A., & Blazevic, V. (2016). Leveraging value in multi-stakeholder innovation
networks: A process framework for value co-creation and capture. Industrial Marketing
Management, 56, 40-50
Richards, G., Marques, L., & Mein, K. (Eds.). (2014). Event design: Social perspectives and practices.
Routledge.
Rihova, I., Buhalis, D., Gouthro, M.B. and Moital, M. (2018), Customer-to-customer co-creation
practices in tourism: Lessons from Customer-Dominant logic, Tourism Management, Vol. 67, pp.
362–375.
Rihova, I., Buhalis, D., Moital, M., & Gouthro, M. B. (2015). Conceptualising customer‐to‐customer value
co‐creation in tourism. International Journal of Tourism Research, 17(4), 356-363.
Ross, D., Saxena, G., Correia, F., & Deutz, P. (2017). Archaeological tourism: A creative approach. Annals
of Tourism Research, 67, 37-47.
Sigala, M. (2016). Social media and the co-creation of tourism experiences. In Sotiriadis and Gursoy
(Eds.) The Handbook of Managing and Marketing Tourism Experiences (85-111). Emerald Group
Publishing Limited.
Sigala, M., & Gretzel, U. (2017). Advances in Social Media for Travel, Tourism and Hospitality: New
Perspectives, Practice and Cases. Routledge.
Smed, K., Dressler, S., & Have, P. (2016). The Vikings Are Here! Experiencing Volunteering at a Viking
Heritage Site. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 16(1), 94-109.
Snepenger, D., Snepenger, M., Dalbey, M., & Wessol, A. (2007). Meanings and consumption
characteristics of places at a tourism destination. Journal of travel Research, 45(3), 310-321.
Stamboulis, Y., & Skayannis, P. (2003). Innovation strategies and technology for experience-based
tourism. Tourism management, 24(1), 35-43.
Strandberg, C., Nath, A., Hemmatdar, H., & Jahwash, M. (2018). Tourism research in the new
millennium: A bibliometric review of literature in Tourism and Hospitality Research. Tourism and
Hospitality Research, 18(3), 269-285.
Tiago, T., Couto, J. P., Tiago, F., & Faria, S. D. (2017). From comments to hashtags strategies: enhancing
cruise communication in Facebook and Twitter. An International Multidisciplinary Journal of
Tourism, 12(3), 19-47.
Torres-Salinas, D., Lopez-Cózar, E. D., & Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2009). Ranking of departments and
researchers within a university using two different databases: Web of Science versus Scopus.
Scientometrics, 80(3), 761-774.
Tsai, S. P. (2017). Driving holistic innovation to heighten hotel customer loyalty. Current Issues in
Tourism, 20(15), 1604-1619. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2015.1043249
Tung, V. W. S., & Au, N. (2018). Exploring customer experiences with robotics in hospitality.
Tussyadiah, I. P. (2014). Toward a theoretical foundation for experience design in tourism. Journal of
Travel Research, 53(5), 543-564.
22
UNWTO (2018). http://www2.unwto.org/event/upcoming

Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing,
68(1), 1-17.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the
Academy of marketing Science, 36(1), 1-10.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant
logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5-23.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2017). Service-dominant logic 2025. International Journal of Research in
Marketing, 34(1), 46-67.
Vargo, S.L., Maglio, P.P., Akaka, M.A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: a service systems and
service logic perspective. European Management Journal, 26(3), 145–152.
Varkaris, E., & Neuhofer, B. (2017). The influence of social media on the consumers’ hotel decision
journey. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 8(1), 101-118.
Viglia, G., Pera, R., & Bigné, E. (2018). The determinants of stakeholder engagement in digital platforms.
Journal of Business Research, 89, 404-410
Vigolo, V. (2017). Older tourist behavior and marketing tools. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
von Friedrichs Grängsjö, Y., & Gummesson, E. (2006). Hotel networks and social capital in destination
marketing. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 17(1), 58-75.
Whittaker, J. (1989). Creativity and conformity in science: Titles, keywords and co-word analysis. Social
Studies of Science, 19(3), 473–496.
Wu, J., Law, R., & Liu, J. (2018). Co-creating value with customers: a study of mobile hotel bookings in
China. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(4), 2056-2074.
Yoo, K. H., & Gretzel, U. (2016). Use and Creation of Social Media by travellers. In Sigala, Christou &
Gretzel (Eds.). Social media in travel, tourism and hospitality: Theory, practice and cases. (pp. 189-
205). Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
23
Price determinants of Airbnb listing prices in Lake Balaton
Touristic Region, Hungary
Gábor Dudás 1*, Tamás Kovalcsik 2, György Vida 3,

Lajos Boros 4 and Gyula Nagy 5
1
Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, 5600 Békéscsaba, Szabó Dezső utca 42, Hungary. Email:
dudasgabor5@gmail.com
2 Department of Economic and Social Geography, University of Szeged, Hungary. Email: kovalcsik.tamas@geo.u-
szeged.hu
3 Department of Economic and Social Geography, University of Szeged, Hungary. Email: vidagy@geo.u-szeged.hu
4 Department of Economic and Social Geography, University of Szeged, Hungary. Email: borosl@geo.u-szeged.hu
5 Department of Economic and Social Geography, University of Szeged, Hungary. Email:
geo.nagy.gyula@gmail.com
Abstract
The aim of the paper was to investigate the impact of different accommodation attributes on Airbnb listing prices
in a touristic area. The study applied hedonic price modeling utilizing a sample of 2417 Airbnb accommodation
rental offers in the Lake Balaton Touristic Region in Hungary. Our results revealed that property-related attributes
significantly influence Airbnb prices although the magnitude of these effects is very diverse and complex. The OLS
findings showed that the provision of air conditioning, free internet, and free parking are the main determinants
of Airbnb price in the sample area, while the number of available photos and the presence of a kitchen does not
significantly influence the price. The quantile regression results further demonstrated that capacity, the provision
of breakfast, and TV leads to higher prices among the higher-priced accommodations, while the number of
bedrooms and bathrooms, smoking, and free parking influence more the prices of lower-end accommodations.
Keywords: sharing economy, Airbnb, peer-to-peer accommodation rental, hedonic price regression, quantile
regression
Citation: Dudás, G., Kovalcsik, T., Vida, G., Boros, L. and Nagy, G. (2020). Price determinants of Airbnb listing
prices in Lake Balaton Touristic Region, Hungary. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2410.

RESEARCH PAPER 1
Price determinants of Airbnb listing prices in Lake Balaton Touristic Region, Hungary
Introduction
Every night, tens of thousands of people decide not to stay in traditional accommodations like hotels
but use the services of peer-to-peer (P2P) accommodation sharing platforms that allow ordinary people
to rent residences to tourists. For more than a decade now, P2P accommodation sharing emerged as a
major trend shaping the global tourism and hospitality industry (Guttentag & Smith, 2017; Magno et al.,
2018), disrupting the way the tourism sector is running (Bakker et al., 2018; Guttentag, 2015) and led to
the complete restructuring of markets and the appearance of new travel forms (Forno & Garibaldi, 2015;
Önder et al., 2018). The rise of the phenomenon is remarkable, as the share of P2P accommodation in
2018 make up about 7% of the global accommodation supply, and the projected annual growth rate for
the P2P accommodation economy is expected to be 31% between 2013 and 2025 (Bakker et al., 2018).
However, P2P accommodation rental has not necessarily created entirely new demand, as people
informally renting out their residences to tourists has existed for a long time (Guttentag et al., 2018;
Magno et al., 2018). But the development of Internet platforms and mobile technologies have brought
many new ways of sharing and revolutionized this practice by facilitating older forms of P2P
accommodation sharing on a larger scale (Gutiérrez et al., 2017), or at least increased and made this new
type of supply more visible (Önder et al., 2018).
Since its inception in 2008, Airbnb has experienced rapid growth and from a small start-up it has
become the most important global player among P2P accommodation platforms with nearly 5 million
listings and more than 300 million guest arrivals in 81 000 cities in 191 countries (Airbnb, 2018). The
essence and rapid success of Airbnb lies on the effective mix of several key factors, including affordable
prices and economic advantages (Tussyadiah, 2015), authenticity and unique consumer experience
(Guttentag, 2015; Magno et al., 2018; Tussyadiah & Pesonen, 2016; Wang et al., 2016), sustainability
(Midgett et al., 2017), flexible supply (Li & Srinivasan, 2018), perceived attractiveness and responsiveness
of the host (Ert et al., 2016; Gunter & Önder, 2018), and the accommodation’s ratings (Tussyadiah &
Zach, 2017). Above all these advantages, price and lower cost are frequently reported as one of the most
important factors facilitating the rapid diffusion of P2P accommodation sharing phenomenon (Pizam,
2014; Tussyadiah & Pesonen, 2016). As long known, price is one of the main determinants of hotel choice
in tourism and hospitality industry (Lockyer, 2005), therefore, hotel room pricing is a well-researched
topic (Gibbs et al., 2017). As the popularity of and demand for P2P accommodations has increased,
pricing became a relevant issue in the sharing economy based accommodation sector as well, and
understanding Airbnb prices became crucial both from practical and theoretical perspectives.
Nevertheless, it has to be noted that as P2P rentals are privately owned apartments or houses and the
vast majority of them are managed by non-professional hosts, thus, the price determining attributes
and mechanism may differ from those determining hotel room price (Önder et al., 2018; Wang &
Nicolau, 2017), even though they share many common features (e.g. site and property attributes,
amenities). Therefore, we think it is important to examine the impact of these accommodation
attributes – which are also relevant to the traditional hotel industry – on price in the sharing economy
based accommodation sector. P2P accommodation rental in its present form is relatively new, but the
number of studies investigating the price determining factors and the underlying pricing strategies of
this phenomenon is growing rapidly (Gibbs et al., 2017; Hrobath et al., 2017; Li et al., 2016a; Wang &
Nicolau, 2017). The majority of these studies focus mainly on larger cities, however, the importance of
Airbnb is rising in popular coastal resorts and holiday destinations and regions as well (Adamiak, 2018).
These regions differ in several characteristics from larger cities – e.g. the spatial patterns of supply,
population distribution, the spatiality and other features of the real estate market and the housing stock,
etc. Thus, the impact of P2P accommodations can be different in these regions than in large cities, but
this issue is largely unexplored in the existing body of literature. Therefore, the main aim of this study
2
Dudás et al. (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2410
is to shed light on the determining factors of Airbnb accommodation prices in a touristic region. For
this purpose, the Lake Balaton Touristic Region in Hungary was selected for a case study.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: the next section reviews the related work on Airbnb
and focuses on previous researches considering hedonic price theory and quantile regression. Then, the
paper describes and presents the applied data and study methodology. Afterwards, the paper presents
our empirical findings and finally, we conclude the paper, and discuss its limitations and present the
directions for future work.
Literature review
The sharing economy and Airbnb
The sharing of goods, spaces, services, and skills among individuals is not a completely new
phenomenon, but the scope of these activities was very limited in the past due to the difficulty of
matching supply and demand and the lack of trust between strangers (Ranjbari et al., 2018). In the last
decade, the mix of many factors such as the proliferation of the Internet and mobile technologies,
globalization, urbanization, the global economic crisis, and shifts in general attitudes towards
consumption and sustainability had come to cover these gaps and fostered the advent of the sharing
economy (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Mody et al., 2017; Möhlmann, 2015; Ranjbari et al., 2018). Under the
“tent” of the sharing economy, these technological innovations, economic and social changes are
transforming the way people produce, consume, travel, and communicate among many other activities
(Alizadeh et al., 2018; Quattrone et al., 2016; Van der Borg et al., 2017) and expand traditional trading
and consumption practices (Sung et al., 2018).
The phenomenon of the sharing economy appeared in the early 2000s (Sung et al., 2018), however, given
its exponential growth, in recent days, it is estimated that 72% of Americans (Pew Research Center,
2016) and 70% of Europeans (OCU, 2016) are involved in sharing economy activities (Murillo et al., 2017).
Furthermore, it has tremendous market potential as the revenue generated by the key sharing economy
sectors are estimated to increase from $15 billion today to roughly $335 billion by 2025 (PWC, 2015ab).
Services covered by the sharing economy range from transportation (e.g. Uber, Lyft) to accommodation
(e.g. Airbnb, HomeAway) to finance (e.g. Kickstarter, Prosper) (Dudás et al., 2017b; Hamari et al., 2016;
Quattrone et al., 2016). P2P marketplaces associated with the sharing economy operate particularly
within the field of travel and tourism and the most popular and important player in the hospitality
sector is the home sharing platform Airbnb (Boros et al., 2018; Dann et al., 2019; Dudás et al., 2017a;
Guttentag, 2015; Wang & Jeong, 2018). Airbnb, by providing access to millions of spaces from apartments
and villas to castles, igloos, treehouses, or boats has recorded more than 400 million guest arrivals
(Airbnb, 2018) since its launch in 2008, without owning a single room. By mid-2018, it was estimated to
worth more than $38bn (Forbes, 2018) meaning that it is valued more than the world’s largest hotel
chains such as the Hilton Hotels & Resorts, Marriott, or Hyatt (Akbar & Tracogna, 2018; Statista, 2018).
Given the exponential growth of Airbnb and its disruptive potential (Guttentag, 2015), it has received
considerable scholarly attention and researchers have begun to examine a variety of issues related to
Airbnb. Several studies put focus on challenges and potential threats to Airbnb’s future growth
(Guttentag, 2015; Meleo et al., 2016), while other address regulatory and tax issues (Guttentag, 2017;
Hajibaba & Dolnicar, 2017; Jefferson-Jones, 2015; Kaplan & Nadler, 2015) indicating that new regulatory
frameworks should be established to enable Airbnb to operate legally (Edelman & Gerardin, 2015). More
recently, many scholars have turned their attention to the impact of Airbnb on housing market and
rental prices (Delgado-Medrano & Lyon, 2016; Lee, 2016; Samaan, 2015; Wachsmuth & Weisler, 2018)
highlighting that due to the diffusion of Airbnb, entire homes and apartments are disappearing from
the local housing market and this process may drive up the rents in several cities (Ke, 2017) and exclude
3
residents from tourist areas (Dogru et al., 2017; Oskam & Boswijk, 2016). Moreover, there have been
many reports on the effects of Airbnb on the tourism industry (Fang et al., 2016; Gutiérrez et al., 2017;
Van der Borg et al., 2017) including Airbnb’s impact on hotel prices (Aznar et al., 2017; Choi et al., 2015;
Neeser et al., 2015; Xie & Kwok, 2017; Zervas et al., 2017), on hotel sales (Blal et al., 2018), on hotel
occupancy rates (Ginindza & Tichaawa, 2017), and on tourism industry employment (Fang et al., 2016).
Furthermore, there were recent studies set up to explore prices and pricing decisions on Airbnb
(Edelman & Luca, 2014; Kakar et al., 2016; Teubner et al., 2017). However, given the Airbnb is primarily
an urban phenomenon, empirical papers focus mainly on large cities (Gibbs et al., 2017; Wang & Nicolau,
2017) and investigations on holiday destinations is lacking. In the following section, the paper reviews
the relevant studies focusing on hotel price determinants and reveal recent findings conducted for
Airbnb pricing determinants.
Pricing issues in the Tourism and Hospitality industry / hedonic price regression
Pricing is a relevant issue in the tourism and hospitality literature (Hung et al., 2010), however, the price
consumers are willing to pay for an accommodation largely depends on the attributes an
accommodation can offer (Castro & Ferreira, 2015). Wang and Nicolau (2017) categorize these factors
into five categories: site-specific characteristics, quality signalling factors, hotel amenities and services,
property characteristics, and external factors. The effects of these attributes on price attracted
significant scholarly attention by hospitality and tourism researchers in recent years, and many studies
have investigated the pricing strategies in the traditional hospitality industry (Becerra et al., 2013; Castro
& Ferreira, 2018; Chen & Rothschild, 2010; Espinet et al., 2003; Hung et al., 2010; Lee, 2016; Masiero et
al., 2015; Schamel, 2012; Thrane, 2007; Yang et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2011b).
A widely applied method for assessing the importance of these attributes is hedonic price modeling,
which is credited to Rosen (1974) and is based on the idea that different price for a product or service
can be viewed as composites of attributes and characteristics. Thus, the hedonic function can reveal
how marketable product features will be reflected in the products market prices, in other words, it can
outline, for example, how room/accommodation prices will change when characteristics of
room/accommodation change (Schamel, 2012; Teubner et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2011b). A number of
recent contributions employ hedonic models, for example, Espinet, Saez, Coenders and Fluvia (2003)
examined how attributes of holiday hotels in a sun-and-beach segment influence room prices and found
that hotel size, distance to the beach, and the availability of free parking space have significant effect
on price. Thrane (2007) applied the same approach in the city of Oslo and also showed evidence that
the presence of attributes such as free parking, location, or a mini-bar are the main determinants of
room rates in capital cities. Likewise, Zhang, Ye and Law (2011b) used regression models to analyse how
room attributes and hotel class influence room rates in New York City hotels and revealed that hotel
location and room quality are the important determinants of room prices. Chen and Rothschild (2010)
analysed the impact of a variety of attributes on hotel room rates in Taipei and the empirical findings
showed that hotel location, the availability of LED TV, and the presence of conference facilities have
significant effects on both weekday and weekend prices. Furthermore, Schamel (2012) estimated the
willingness to pay for different hotel characteristics and found that the important determining factors
of hotel room prices are popularity ratings, hotel star ratings, weeks of advance booking, and certain
other hotel characteristics such as express check-out, room service, and Internet access. Hung, Shang
and Wang (2010), in addition, applied OLS regression supplemented with quantile regression to provide
a more complex characterization of price determinants in Taiwanese hotels. The OLS results showed
that number of rooms, age of hotel, and number of housekeeping staff per person are the major
determining attributes of hotel room rates, while the quantile regression further refined these results
and demonstrated that hotel age and market conditions are only significant in the high-priced hotel
4
category. In another study, Zhang, Zhang, Lu, Cheng and Zhang (2011a) applied geographically weighted
regression and examined how site and situation attributes can affect room prices in Beijing and found
that star rating, hotel age, and location have the greatest influence on hotel room rates. Across these
findings, the most commonly reported factors determining hotel room price are related to physical
characteristics of the offerings (Gibbs et al., 2017), in addition, location and amenities – especially
parking – are highlighted as further significant influencing factors.
However, while hotel room price has an important role in the traditional hospitality industry (Zhang et
al., 2017), it has also a vital role in the room pricing decision of the sharing economy based
accommodation rental, since price (and the possibility to save money) is one of the main influencers on
the guest’s accommodation selection decisions and on hosts’ profits as well (Tussyadiah & Pesonen,
2016; Zhang et al., 2017). Nevertheless, given the difference between traditional and sharing economy
based accommodation products some of the price determinants of the traditional hospitability industry
are unsuited for the sharing economy, therefore, new price indicators such as host characteristics (e.g.
Superhost status, profile picture), special amenities, and diversified accommodation characteristics
were identified to bridge this gap (Wang & Nicolau, 2017).
As highlighted above, a significant number of studies have investigated the price determinants of hotels,
but only a limited number of papers have explored what factors affect the prices of sharing economy
based accommodation rentals, especially Airbnb. For example, Gutt and Herrmann (2015) examined
how star ratings and rating visibility affect listing prices on the Airbnb platform and reported that rating
star visibility significantly increases prices by an average of 2,69 Euro. Kakar, Franco, Voelz and Wu
(2016) examined the effect of host information (e.g. race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) on Airbnb
price in San Francisco and found that Hispanic and Asian host charge lower prices (on average 9.6%
and 9.3%) than their white counterparts, while Ert, Fleischer and Magen (2016) reported that a
trustworthy photo of the host may be associated with higher listing price and the higher probability of
being chosen. Li, Pan, Yang and Guo (2016b) analysed that how the distance to the nearest landmark,
the impact of a facility, and the popularity of the nearest landmark affect Airbnb prices and proved
positive effects. Hrobath, Leisch and Dolnicar (2017) identified the drivers of price on entire properties
in Vienna and found that location is the primary driver of prices and properties with more amenities
charge higher prices. Teubner, Hawlitschek and Dann (2017) quantified the price effects of reputation
features using a large scale dataset from 86 German cities and found that indexes such as hosts’ ranking
scores and duration of membership are associated with economic value. Similarly, Gibbs, Guttentag,
Gretzel, Morton and Goodwill (2017) examined the impact of a variety of attributes on the rates of
Airbnb by using the listings information in five Canadian areas reporting that physical characteristics,
location, and host characteristics significantly affect prices. Likewise, Wang and Nicolau (2017) in their
study investigated Airbnb rental offers in 33 cities by using OLS and quantile regression through the
analysis of 25 explanatory variables and highlighted the relationship between these attributes and
accommodation price.
In summary, the number of studies on pricing issues of sharing economy based accommodation rentals
is growing rapidly, however, these focus primarily on large cities, therefore Airbnb’s impact on larger
touristic regions remains unclear. The remaining part of the paper aims to bridge this gap.
Methodology and data

Study area
The area selected for this study was the Lake Balaton Touristic Region in Hungary. We choose this
holiday destination area for several reasons. First, Lake Balaton is the greatest lake in Central Europe,
5
and the oldest and most established tourist destination in Hungary (Puczkó & Rátz, 2000; Törzsök et
al., 2017). In 2017, the region hosted more than 2.4 million tourists and the number of overnight stays
totaled 8 million (33% of them international stays), with an average stay of 3.2 nights (CSO, 2019),
generating a huge demand for accommodation services. Thus, behind the Hungarian capital Budapest,
Lake Balaton is the second most visited tourist area in Hungary (Domonkos et al., 2016). Second, the
phenomenon of locals renting out their homes or rooms for tourist exists in the region for decades and
it became a widespread practice. This long-standing tradition is represented in the capacity of
accommodation supply as well, namely, in 2018, 615 commercial accommodation establishments offered
more than 94 thousand bed places, while more than 19 000 private accommodation establishments
(short-term rentals) offered more than 108 thousand bed places in the region (CSO, 2019). These
numbers may also highlight, that unlike large cities, P2P accommodation rental in this region can be
built on existing stocks of holiday homes, and create an extensive capacity for the supply side of sharing
economy based accommodation rental and may scale it dramatically and raise it to a new level. As a
result, Airbnb became a major actor in the hospitality industry in the region and can provide an
appropriate study area and an important benchmark for other Airbnb studies.
Data and variables

The region – according to Hungarian law [1] – consists of 180 settlements and the study was based on
Airbnb listings from this area. The database was compiled by applying web-scraping technology to
gather publicly available information directly from the Airbnb website. Web-scraping is an innovative
and more frequently applied data collecting method (Gibbs et al., 2017; Gunter & Önder, 2018; Horn &
Merante, 2017; Smith et al., 2018) and its essence lies in that a web-crawler (computer program) visits
the selected website and based on specified parameters saves the information displayed on the site into
a database for further analysis (Gyódi, 2017; Olmedilla et al., 2016). The data was collected for July 2018
and Table 1 presents a brief description of the sample and the variables reporting a total of 2417 listings
of the region. Descriptive statistics of the sample highlight that the average rental price for the sampled
Airbnb listings is $89.49, however, offers cover a wide spectrum of different listing prices within the
region indicated by the high standard deviation values. The predominant room types are entire homes
or apartments accounting for the largest proportion (86%), followed by private rooms (14%) and shared
rooms represent only a marginal share (less than 1%). The main characteristics of the Airbnb inventory
in the region are the follows: 94% have a kitchen; 70% offer free wireless internet access and 88% have
a TV; only 7% offer breakfast and 30% are equipped with air conditioning; smoking is not allowed in
67% of the accommodations.
Data analysis
The hedonic pricing method, widely credited to Rosen (1974), is based on the idea that different price
for a product or service can be viewed as composites of attributes and characteristics. Thus, the hedonic
function can reveal how marketable product features will be reflected in the products market prices, in
other words, it can outline, for example, how room/accommodation prices will change when
characteristics of room/accommodation change (Schamel, 2012; Teubner et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2011b).
To assess the accommodation attributes’ economic value and quantify the individual impact of certain
features on Airbnb accommodation price, we conducted hedonic price regression supplemented with
quantile regression (QR) analysis to reveal the nexuses between a dependent variable and a set of
predictor variables. As a dependent variable price per person per night (in a logarithmic form) was
selected, while the independent variables are described in Table1. Hedonic price regression was based
6
Table 1. Brief description of the variable list (n=2417)

Variable name Description of variable/attribute Mean/ Standard
proportion deviation
PRICE Listed price per night (In US dollars) 89.49 83.91
LnPRICE Price, logged 4.25 0.67
DISTANCE Distance between the location of the Airbnb 2.26 3.96
accommodation and the lakeside (in km)
ENTIRE Entire home/apartment (Dummy variable) 0.86 0.35
HOME/APT
PRIVATE ROOM Private room (Dummy variable) 0.14 0.35
SHARED ROOM Shared room (Dummy variable) 0.005 0.07
CAPACITY The number of people that can be 5.55 2.94
accommodated
BEDROOMS The number of bedrooms 2.32 1.43
BED NUMBER The number of beds 4.35 3.17
BATHROOMS The number of bathrooms 1.53 1.05
KITCHEN Kitchen is available (Dummy variable) 0.94 0.25
BREAKFAST Offer breakfast (Dummy variable) 0.07 0.25
INTERNET Free wireless internet access (Dummy 0.70 0.46
variable)
TV Offer a TV (Dummy variable) 0.88 0.33
AIR Offer Air Conditioning (Dummy variable) 0.30 0.46
CONDITIONING
FREE PARKING Offer free parking (Dummy variable) 0.84 0.37
POOL Offer a pool (Dummy variable) 0.19 0.39
PHOTOS Number of photos about the accommodation 17.53 11.35
SMOKING Smoking is not allowed (Dummy variable) 0.67 0.47
on the conditional mean of the dependent variable, estimating the average response of the independent
variable to changes in the explanatory variables (Wang & Nicolau, 2017). In doing so, the following
equation representing the general hedonic model was formulated:
ln(Pi) = α + ∑kβkxki + εi (1)
where ln(Pi) is the embodiment of the natural logarithmic transformation of the price per person per
night linked with booking i, α is a constant term, the coefficients β k are the implicit prices for Airbnb
attributes linked with the k-th independent variable xki representing the associated Airbnb
characteristics, while ε is Normal error (Hung et al., 2010; Masiero et al., 2015; Schamel, 2012). Many
authors suggest that multicollinearity may be a problematic issue in hedonic models (Andersson, 2010;
Yang et al., 2016). Thus, to address this issue, we calculated the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) to detect
the seriousness of multicollinearity. According to Kennedy (2018), multicollinearity is a serious problem
if the VIF value is above ten. In this study, all the VIF values were below the commonly used threshold
point of 10 – the highest VIF value was 4.49 – indicating that multicollinearity is not a problematic issue
in the present study. Moreover, we have to keep in mind, when assessing the effect of a dummy
independent variable on a log-dependent variable in a log-linear hedonic pricing regression that we
have to transform the coefficient by (eβ-1), where β is the coefficient and e is the base of natural
logarithm (Gibbs et al., 2017; Halvorsen & Palmquist, 1980), and this gives the estimated effect of the
dummy variables in percentage terms.
7
However, the hedonic pricing model may give an incomplete description of the conditional distribution
(Hung et al., 2010; Mosteller & Tukey, 1977) as it only considers the average relationship between price
and the other explanatory variables. Therefore, to move beyond the analysis of the conditional mean of
the dependent variable and provide information about the higher and lower tail behaviour of the
distribution, quantile regression was also applied. In addition to hedonic price regression, QR measures
the effects of individual explanatory variables on the whole distribution of the dependent variable and
may reveal the hidden price-response patterns (Wang & Nicolau, 2017) and further increases the
interpretability of the results (Masiero et al., 2015). According to Koenker (2005), quantile regression
was specified as follows:
Presuming that Y is a real value random variable with a cumulative distribution function F Y(y) = P(Y <
y), the τth quantile of Y can be given by
QY(τ) = inf{y:FY(y) > τ} (2)

where 0 < τ < 1.
Results and discussion

Table 2 reports the results of the OLS including the effects of the independent variables (in percent) on
price and presents the estimated coefficients at the 10 th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th quantiles of the quantile
regression analysis. All the selected dependent variables of the general OLS analysis have a significant
effect on Airbnb price except ‘kitchen’ and ‘photo’, while the quantile regression results are showing us
mixed and more complex and sophisticated results.
Looking first at the variable distance, it is outlined, that consistent with previous studies (Gibbs et al.,
2017; Wang & Nicolau, 2017) location of the Airbnb rental has significant negative effect on price,
indicating that with each additional kilometer the accommodation is located away from the lakeside,
the price decreases with 2.55%. The pattern of the quantile parameters signifies that the negative effect
of distance is greater for lower-priced rentals (Table 3).
The OLS regression estimates that the room type entire home/apt has a noteworthy significant positive
impact on price associated with an increase of 17.87%, indicating that an entire home leads to higher
prices. Moreover, the numbers of the quantile regression provide richer information reflecting a
decreasing pattern, thus, highlighting that the influence of this attribute is higher in the lower-priced
accommodations and lower for the higher-priced accommodations, while at the 90 th quantile it has an
insignificant effect on accommodation price.
The attributes related to the size of the rentals – such as capacity, bedroom number, bed count, and
bathroom number – have mixed effects on price. From the OLS results capacity and bedroom number
signifies sizeable positive influence, while somewhat unexpectedly, bed number and bathroom number
are negatively related to rental price, which is inconsistent with previous findings. More specifically,
capacity – which embodies the number of people that can be accommodated – exhibit that each increase
in capacity (person) may result in a price increase of 10.8% and each additional bedroom can give rise
to Airbnb price by 8.69%. In other words, the accommodation is more expensive if it accommodates
more people and has more bedrooms. Although this result was foreseeable, quantile estimates highlight
the positive impact of capacity on price is consistently stronger for the higher priced-listings, while in
contrast, bedroom number affects lower-priced hotels much more. Furthermore, the OLS regression for
8
Table 2. Estimated results of OLS and quantile regression

Variable OLS Diff (%) 0.1 0.25 0.5 0.75 0.9
DISTANCE -0.026*** -2.555 -0.0336*** -0.0254*** -0.0193*** -0.0244*** -0.0184***
ENTIRE
HOME/APT 0.164*** 17.869 0.24812*** 0.1592** 0.1522*** 0.0996* -0.0145
CAPACITY 0.096*** 10.076 0.0346* 0.0901*** 0.1041*** 0.1273*** 0.1416***
BEDROOMS 0.083*** 8.692 0.1353*** 0.0777*** 0.0679*** 0.0727*** 0.0534*
BED NUMBER -0.034*** -3.313 -0.0169 -0.0285*** -0.0208*** -0.0271*** -0.0425***
BATHROOMS -0.056** -5.424 -0.1371*** -0.1077*** -0.0386** -0.0235 0.0173
KITCHEN -0.050 -4.841 -0.0718 -0.0282 -0.0938* -0.0861 -0.0802
BREAKFAST 0.127* 13.550 0.0943 0.106 0.1117** 0.1728** 0.2024**
INTERNET 0.171*** 18.666 0.1189* 0.1706*** 0.1429*** 0.1625*** 0.1557***
TV -0.151*** -14.047 0.0992 -0.0353 -0.1553*** -0.2035*** -0.2305***
AIR
CONDITIONING 0.317*** 37.367 0.2892*** 0.2779*** 0.3373*** 0.3489*** 0.3425***
FREE PARKING -0.206*** -18.599 -0.3041*** -0.2228*** -0.1989*** -0.1577*** -0.1074*
POOL 0.137*** 14.661 0.1176* 0.1268** 0.1194*** 0.2012*** 0.1274**
PHOTOS 0.001 0.108 -0.0029 -0.0029* -0.0015 0.0025* 0.0049**
SMOKING -0.156*** -14.403 -0.3066*** -0.3008*** -0.1522*** -0.0510 -0.1308
Notes: * denotes p < 0,05, ** denotes p < 0,01, *** denotes p < 0,001
Table 3. Significant differences among quantiles (p-values)

Variable 0.1, 0.25 0.25, 0.5 0.5, 0.75 0.75, 0.9
DISTANCE 0.086 0.016 0.183 0.077
ENTIRE
HOME/APT 0.198 0.895 0.282 0.019
CAPACITY 0.005 0.339 0.066 0.198
BEDROOMS 0.105 0.685 0.834 0.486
BED NUMBER 0.321 0.473 0.600 0.118
BATHROOMS 0.346 0.013 0.658 0.077
KITCHEN 0.624 0.348 0.876 0.892
BREAKFAST 0.910 0.942 0.478 0.774
INTERNET 0.201 0.393 0.554 0.874
TV 0.216 0.003 0.245 0.589
AIR
CONDITIONING 0.832 0.020 0.730 0.223
FREE PARKING 0.061 0.349 0.276 0.235
POOL 0.870 0.863 0.064 0.010
PHOTOS 0.992 0.055 0.505 0.203
SMOKING 0.883 0.000 0.000 0.478
9
the number of beds and the number of bathrooms gives significant negative coefficients indicating that
an additional bed results in a price decrease of 3.31%, while each additional bathroom is associated with
a price decrease of 5.42%. The results of the quantile regression further indicate that bed number does
not significantly influence accommodation price in the 10 th quantile and the 25th 50th and 75th quantile
parameters take higher values than the 90th. The quantile estimates for bathroom number illustrate
that coefficients of the 75th and 90th quantile are insignificant, while those for 10 th, 25th and 50th are
significant, outlining that the provision of bathrooms leads to lower the prices at the lower-end
accommodations (10th and 25th quantile).
Considering the variable kitchen, no significant effect on price can be outlined according to the results
of both the OLS and the QR analysis, except the 50th quantile where the price is negatively influenced.
The reason that the provision of kitchen is not significant might be that most of the accommodations
(94%) are equipped with a kitchen, therefore, it is considered to be a basic service that is not reflected
in the price of the accommodation.
The provision of breakfast has a positive and significant impact on price and host may charge 13.55%
more, if the accommodation provides this service. However, when quantile regression is evaluated at
the lower-priced accommodations (10th and 25th quantile), the provision of breakfast does not
significantly influence price, but it is significant for the 50 th, 75th, and 90th quantile. This is inconsistent
with previous findings (Wang & Nicolau, 2017), but during the interpretation of the results we have to
note, that only 7% of the listings offer breakfast, so this minority group may charge higher prices in
accommodations, which are priced above average, presumably for please their guest and make the
rental more appealing by offering breakfast as an extra amenity.
The provision of air conditioning has the largest positive and significant influence on price in the
sample. The rates for apartments equipped with air conditioning are priced 37.37% higher than those
without this amenity. The quantile coefficients indicate a mixed pattern highlighting that the influence
of this attribute is lower for the lower-priced accommodations and higher for the higher-priced
accommodations reaching its top in the 75th quantile. These findings support that in a holiday
destination air conditioning is the comfort function (being the most important in the summer) in an
accommodation for which people usually have to pay the most.
Regarding the free wireless internet access, the OLS estimated a significant and positive influence on
the listed price associated with a price increase of 18.67% in those rooms which have such access. In
addition, the coefficients of the quantile estimates highlight different magnitudes as we move up the
conditional distribution signifying that accommodations in the lowest-priced quantile do not charge as
much for free internet as their higher-priced (50th, 75th, and 90th quantile) competitors, however, the
25th quantile listings increase the price most in order to have free internet access.
Between the amenities that were considered, the provision of TV and free parking have a significant
negative effect on price. The OLS regression stresses that rates for accommodations equipped with a
TV are about 14.08% less than those without such appliances. However, quantile estimates signify that
the effect of this variable is not significant for the 10th and 25th quantile, while coefficients of the other
three quantile highlight that the presence of a TV is less important among the higher-priced listings.
The amenity free parking has also a significant negative impact on prices with decreasing values in the
quantile coefficients. The OLS result highlight the presence of a free parking spot is associated with a
price decrease of 18.6% while the quantile estimates outline that the negative effect is higher for the
lower-priced accommodations and lower for the higher priced ones. These results are inconsistent with
10
previous findings on hotel price determinants (Espinet et al., 2003; Thrane, 2007) and Airbnb price
determinants (Wang & Nicolau, 2017) showing that the provision of this attribute in a touristic region
may have a quite different effect than the same variable for a hotel or an Airbnb accommodation in a
city region.
The provision of pool is associated with significant price increase of 14.66% while quantile coefficients
are relatively constant except the 75th quantile where positive impact of this amenity is the highest.
The number of available photos about the accommodation does not significantly influence listing price
according to the results of the OLS, however quantile estimates coefficients vary over the conditional
distribution signifying that the 10th and 50th quantile are insignificant, the 25th quantile is significant but
negatively affect accommodation price, while the 75th and 90th quantile are significant with positive
impact on price, although the degree of this effect is very low.
Finally, the attribute smoking has also a significant negative effect, thus in those apartments where
smoking is allowed host charge 14.40% less than in those where smoking is not permitted. The quantile
estimates highlight that the negative effect is stronger at the lower-tail apartments, however, the
coefficients for the 75th and 90th quantile are insignificant. The results are consistent with previous
findings (Wang & Nicolau, 2017) and strengthen the assumption that hosts are trying to make their
(smoking)homes more attractive by lowering their prices.
Conclusions
In the present article, we have investigated whether and how accommodation attributes are associated
with Airbnb accommodation prices in a touristic region and quantified these effects by applying OLS
and quantile regression analysis. In line with previous studies, the findings confirm that property-
related attributes significantly influence Airbnb prices in a touristic region as well, although the
magnitude of these effects is very diverse and complex.
The OLS results showed that the provision of air conditioning, free internet, and free parking are the
main determinants of Airbnb price in the sample area, while the number of available photos and the
presence of a kitchen does not significantly influence the price. The quantile regression results further
demonstrated that capacity, the provision of breakfast and TV leads to higher prices among the higher-
priced accommodations, while the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, smoking, and free parking
influence more the prices of lower-end accommodations.
Findings consistent with previous studies

Our results also illustrate that several factors have similar effects with previous findings. The attributes
related to the size of the rentals such as capacity and bedroom number are associated with higher rental
prices in various cities (Cai et al., 2019; Chen & Xie, 2017; Gibbs et al., 2018; Kakar et al., 2016; Wang &
Nicolau, 2017) and according to our results the listings in the Lake Balaton Tourism Region are no
exception. As expected, entire homes also account for significant price increase. As most previous
studies indicated, location greatly matters both in the case of hotels (Espinet et al., 2003; Thrane, 2007;
Zhang et al., 2011a) and Airbnb rentals (Gibbs et al., 2018; Perez-Sanchez et al., 2018; Wang & Nicolau,
2017; Zhang et al., 2017) as well, and so is the case in the Lake Balaton Region. The smoking allowance
is negatively related to Airbnb price in the study area, which is also in line with previous findings
(Kennedy et al., 2018; Wang & Nicolau, 2017), emphasizing that hosts are trying to lower their prices to
make their (smoking)homes more attractive.
11
Findings different from previous studies

Surprisingly, in contrast with previous studies, the number of beds and the number of bathrooms have
negative influence on price challenging the findings found for Airbnb listings located in major cities
(Cai et al., 2019; Chen & Xie, 2017; Gibbs et al., 2018; Wang & Nicolau, 2017). These two factors may
indicate that listings in the Lake Balaton Tourism Region have different inner characteristics than the
listings in large cities, thus, host take them differently into consideration during their price setting. It
was also inconsistent with previous research (Gibbs et al., 2018; Perez-Sanchez et al., 2018), that the
number of photos does not have a significant effect on price in general as in – only in the 75th and 90th
quantile can be a very low positive impact outlined –, although pictures are perceived as important in
building trust (Ert et al., 2016; Teubner et al., 2017) and may be a good indicator of professionalism
(Gibbs et al., 2018). The next finding inconsistent with previous findings lies in the effect of free parking.
Both hotel research (Espinet et al., 2003; Thrane, 2007) and Airbnb research (Cai et al., 2019; Gibbs et
al., 2018; Wang & Nicolau, 2017) states, that free parking is associated with higher prices in various cities.
However, our results highlight, that in a touristic region due to different spatial and settlement
structure, free parking may have a significantly different effect on Airbnb rental prices than in large
cities.
Limitations and directions for future research

Nevertheless, this study contributes to the existing literature on the price determinants of sharing
economy based accommodation rentals. Practically, the analysis may offer potential implications for
stakeholders of the traditional accommodation industry such as managers, decision makers,
accommodation suppliers to analyse and evaluate their market situation and strategies and improve
their services. Moreover, the present paper may provide hosts with insights how to set up their pricing
strategies to increase their revenues, and may help Airbnb employees to design tools and guides that
can offer hints and tips for hosts for ideal price setting.
We acknowledge that like any piece of research, this study has certain limitations that need to be
highlighted. First, it is temporally limited as only one time period is considered (July 2018), therefore
seasonal differences are missing from the analysis, which needs to be addressed in future studies.
Second, the research is geographically limited as the study focused on an exclusive sample area, namely,
the Lake Balaton Touristic Region, Hungary. Therefore, variations between cities or even regions have
not been fully explored, nevertheless, the study provides insight into that certain accommodation
attributes how may affect Airbnb price in a touristic region. Another limitation is that the research
scrutinizes the accommodation attributes affecting accommodation price and the social, economic, and
psychological factors determining the host price-setting strategies are not considered.
In conclusion, the present research provides relevant insights, however, it underscores the need for
further research. Specifically, future research should expand the time-period and research scope
focusing on the difference in price-determinant nexuses between regions and various city-types. It
would be also important to conduct an analysis to reveal the price-setting differences between
professional and non-professional hosts.
Endnotes
[1]: The list of settlements is set out in the T/18783 Bill of 2017 Urban Planning Plan for Hungary and
certain priority areas (http://www.parlament.hu/irom40/18783/HTMLT18783.pdf)
12
Acknowledgments
The research has been implemented with the support provided from National Research, Development
and Innovation Fund of Hungary (grant number PD128015), financed under the ‘Geographical
examination of peer-to-peer accommodations in Hungary’ funding scheme.
References
Adamiak, C. (2018). Mapping Airbnb supply in European cities. Annals of Tourism Research, 71(C), 67–
71.
Airbnb (2018). Fast Facts. URL: https://press.atairbnb.com/fast-facts/ (Accessed 06.06.2018).
Akbar, Y. H. & Tracogna, A. (2018). The sharing economy and the future of the hotel industry:
Transaction cost theory and platform economics. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
71, 91–101.
Alizadeh, T., Farid, R. & Sarkar, S. (2018). Towards Understanding the Socio-Economic Patterns of
Sharing Economy in Australia: An Investigation of Airbnb Listings in Sydney and Melbourne
Metropolitan regions. Urban Policy and Research, 1–19.
Andersson, D. E. (2010). Hotel attributes and hedonic prices: an analysis of internet-based transactions
in Singapore’s market for hotel rooms. The Annals of Regional Science, 44(2), 229–240.
Aznar, J. P., Sayeras, J. M., Rocafort, A. & Galiana, J. (2017). The irruption of Airbnb and its effects on
hotel profitability: An analysis of Barcelona’s hotel sector. Intangible Capital, 13(1), 147–159.
Bakker, M., Twining-Hard, L., Cordova Lopez, J. E., Gössling, S., Li, W., Nevill, H., Rinne, A., Salern, T.,
Shahidsaless, R. & Shiels, D. (2018). Tourism and the Sharing Economy: Policy & Potential of
Sustainable Peer-to-Peer Accommodation. The World Bank Group. URL:
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/161471537537641836/pdf/130054-REVISED-Tourism-
and-the-Sharing-Economy-PDF.pdf (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Bardhi, F. & Eckhardt, G. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of
Consumer Research, 39(4), 881–898.
Becerra, M., Santaló, J. & Silva, R. (2013). Being better vs. being different: differentiation, competition,
and pricing strategies in the Spanish hotel industry. Tourism Management, 34, 71–79.
Blal, I., Singal, M. & Templin, J. (2018). Airbnb’s effect on hotel sales growth. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 73, 85–92.
Boros, L., Dudás, G., Kovalcsik, T., Papp, S. & Vida, Gy. (2018). Airbnb in Budapest: Analysing spatial
patterns and room rates of hotels and peer-to-peer accommodations. GeoJournal of Tourism and
Geosites, 21(1), 26–38.
Cai, Y., Zhou, Y., Ma, J. & Scott N. (2019). Price determinants of Airbnb listings: Evidence from Hong
Kong. Tourism Analysis, 42, 227–242.
Castro, C. & Ferreira, F. A. (2015). Effects of Hotel Characteristics on Room Rates in Porto: A Hedonic
Price Approach. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1648(1), 1–5.
Castro, C. & Ferreira, F. A. (2018). Online hotel ratings and its influence on hotel room rates: the case of
Lisbon, Portugal. Tourism & Management Studies, 14(1), 63–72.
Chen, Y. & Xie, K. (2017). Consumer valuation of Airbnb listings: A hedonic pricing approach.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(9), 2405–2424.
Chen, C-F. & Rothschild, R. (2010). An application of hedonic pricing analysis to the case of hotel rooms
in Taipei. Tourism Economics, 16(3), 685–694.
Choi, K-H., Jung, J., Ryu, S., Kim, S-D. & Yoon, S-M. (2015). The relationship between Airbnb and the
Hotel Revenue: In the Case of Korea. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 8(26), 1–8.
CSO–Hungarian Central Statistical Office (2019). Dissemination database. URL:
http://statinfo.ksh.hu/Statinfo/themeSelector.jsp?&lang=en (Accessed 07.07.2019)
13
Dann, D., Teubner, T. & Weinhardt, C. (2019). Poster child and guinea pig – insights from a structured
literature review on Airbnb. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(1),
427–473.
Delgado-Medrano, H. M. & Lyon, K. (2016). Short Changing New York City – The impact of Airbnb on
New York City’s housing market. BJH Advisors LLC. URL: http://www.hcc-
nyc.org/documents/ShortchangingNYC2016FINALprotected_000.pdf (Accessed 10.10.2018)
Dogru, T., Mody, M. & Suess, C. (2017). Comparing apples and oranges? Examining the impacts of
Airbnb on hotel performance in Boston. Boston Hospitality Review. URL:
http://www.bu.edu/bhr/2017/06/07/airbnb-in-boston/ (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Domonkos, Á., Sinkovics, K. & Retz, T. (2016). Turizmusgazdaság a Balaton idegenforgalmi régióban
(Tourism industry in Balaton Touristic Region). Területi Statisztika, 56(3), 346–386.
Dudás, G., Boros, L., Kovalcsik, T. & Kovalcsik, B. (2017a). The visualisation of the spatiality of Airbnb
in Budapest using 3-band raster representation. Geographica Technica, 12(1), 23–30.
Dudás, G., Vida, Gy., Kovalcsik, T. & Boros, L. (2017b). A socio-economic analysis of Airbnb in New York
City. Regional Statistics, 7(1), 135–151.
Edelman, B. G. & Gerardin, D. (2015). Efficiencies and Regulatory Shortcuts: How Should We Regulate
Companies like Airbnb and Uber? Stanford Technology Law Review, 19, 293–328.
Edelman, B. G. & Luca, M. (2014). Digital discrimination: The case of Airbnb.com. Harvard Business
School Working Paper No.14-054.
Ert, E., Fleischer, A. & Magen, N. (2016). Trust and reputation in the sharing economy: The role of
personal photos in Airbnb. Tourism Management, 55, 62–73.
Espinet, J. M., Saez, M., Coenders, G. & Fluvia, M. (2003). Effect on prices of the attributes of holiday
hotels: a hedonic prices approach. Tourism Economics, 9(2), 165–177.
Fang, B., Ye, Q. & Law, R. 2016. Effect of Sharing Economy on Tourism Industry Employment. Annals of
Forbes (2018). As a rare profitable unicorn, Airbnb appears to be worth at least $38 billion. URL:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2018/05/11/as-a-rare-profitable-unicorn-airbnb-
appears-to-be-worth-at-least-38-billion/ (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Forno, F. & Garibaldi, R. (2015). Sharing Economy in Travel & Tourism: The Case of Home-Swapping in
Italy. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 16(2), 202–220.
Gibbs, C., Guttentag, D., Gretzel, U., Morton, J. & Goodwill, A. (2017). Pricing in the sharing economy:
a hedonic pricing model applied to Airbnb listings. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 35(1), 45–
56.
Ginindza, S. & Tichaawa, T. M. (2017). The impact of sharing accommodation on the hotel occupancy
rate in the kingdom of Swaziland. Current Issues in Tourism, 1–17.
Gunter, U. & Önder, I. (2018). Determinants of Airbnb demand in Vienna and their implications for the
traditional accommodation industry. Tourism Economics, 24(3), 270–293.
Gutiérrez, J., García-Palomares, J. C., Romanillos, G. & Salas-Olmedo, M. H. (2017). The eruption of
Airbnb in tourist cities: Comparing spatial patterns of hotels and peer-to-peer accommodation in
Barcelona. Tourism Management, 62, 278–291.
Gutt, D. & Herrmann, P. (2015). Sharing Means Caring? Hosts’ Price Reaction to Rating Visibility. ECIS
2015 Research-in-Progress Papers. Paper 54. URL: https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2015_rip/54 (Accessed
10.10.2018).
Guttentag, D. (2015). Airbnb: Disruptive Innovation and the Rise of an Informal Tourism
Accommodation Sector. Current Issues in Tourism, 18(12), 1192–1217.
Guttentag, D. (2017). Regulating Innovation in the Collaborative Economy: An Examination of Airbnb’s
Early Legal Issues. In: Dredge, D., Gyimóthy, Sz. (eds.): Collaborative Economy and Tourism. Tourism
on the Verge, Springer, Cham. 97–128.
14
Guttentag, D. & Smith, S. (2017). Assessing Airbnb as a disruptive innovation relative to hotels:
Substitution and comparative performance expectation. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 64, 1–10.
Guttentag, D., Smith, S., Potwarka, L. & Havitz, M. (2018). Why Tourist Choose Airbnb: A Motivation-
Based Segmentation Study. Journal of Travel Research, 57(3), 342–359.
Gyódi, K. (2017). Airbnb and the Hotel Industry in Warsaw: An Example of Sharing Economy? Central
European Economic Journal, 2(49), 23–34.
Hajibaba, H. & Dolnicar, S. (2017). Regulatory Reactions around the World. In: Dolnicar, S. (ed.): Peer-
to-Peer Accommodation Networks: pushing the boundaries. Goodfellow Publishers Ltd, Oxford,
120–136.
Halvorsen, R. & Palmquist, R. (1980). The interpretation of dummy variables in semilogarithmic
equations. American Economic Review, 70(3), 474–475.
Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M. & Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: Why people participate in
collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association Information Science and Technology, 67, 2047–
2059.
Horn, K. & Merante, M. (2017). Is home sharing driving up rents? Evidence from Airbnb in Boston.
Journal of Housing Economics, 38, 14–24.
Hrobath, B. A., Leisch, F. & Dolnicar, S. (2017). Drivers of Price in City Destination Vienna. In: Dolnicar,
S. (ed.): Peer-to-Peer Accommodation Networks: Pushing the boundaries. Goodfellow Publishers Ltd,
Oxford, 137–147.
Hung, W-T., Shang, J-K. & Wang, F-C. (2010). Pricing determinants in the hotel industry: Quantile
regression analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(3), 378–384.
Jefferson-Jones, J. (2015). Airbnb and the Housing Segment of the Modern “Sharing Economy”: Are
Short-Term Rental Restrictions an Unconstitutional Taking? Hastings Constitutional Law Quaterly,
42, 557–575.
Kakar, V., Franco, J., Voelz, J. & Wu, J. (2016). Effects of Host Race Information on Airbnb Listing Prices
in San Francisco. MPRA Paper No. 69974. URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-
muenchen.de/69974/1/MPRA_paper_69974.pdf (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Kaplan, R. A. & Nadler, M. L. (2015). Airbnb: a case study in occupancy regulation and taxation. The
University of Chicago Law Review Dialogue, 82(1), 103–115.
Ke, Q. (2017). Sharing Means Renting? An Entire-marketplace Analysis of Airbnb. Proceedings of the
2017 ACM on Web Science Conference (2017). 131–139.
Kennedy, P. (2008). A guide to Econometrics. Blackwell Publishing.
Kennedy, R. D., Douglas, O., Stehouwer, L. & Dawson, J. (2018). The availability of smoking-permitted
accommodations from Airbnb in 12 Canadian cities. Tobacco Control, 27(1), 112–116.
Koenker, R. (2005). Quantile Regression. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Lee, D. (2016). How Airbnb Short-Term Rentals Exacerbate Los Angeles’s Affordable Housing Crisis:
Analysis and Policy Recommendations. Harvard Policy and Law Review, 10, 229–253.
Li, H. & Srinivasan, K. (2018). Competitive Dynamics in the Sharing Economy: An Analysis in the
Context of Airbnb and Hotels. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.319769 (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Li, J., Moreno, A. & Zhang, D. (2016a). Pros vs Joes: Agent Pricing Behavior in the Sharing Economy
(August 28, 2016). Ross School of Business Paper No. 1298. URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2708279 (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Li, Y., Pan, Q., Yang, T. & Guo, L. (2016b). Reasonable Price Recommendation on Airbnb Using Multi-
Scale Clustering. In Proceedings of the 35th Chinese Control Conference. 7038-7041. URL:
https://doi.org/10.1109/ChiCC.2016.7554467 (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Lockyer, T. (2015). The perceived importance of price as one hotel selection dimension. Tourism
Management, 26(4), 529–537.
15
Magno, F., Cassia, F. & Ugolini, M. (2018). Accommodation prices on Airbnb: effects of host experience
and market demand. The TQM Journal, 30(5), 608–620.
Masiero, L., Nicolau, J. L. & Law, R. (2015). A demand-driven analysis of tourist accommodation price:
A quantile regression of room bookings. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 50, 1–8.
Meleo, L., Romolini, A. & De Marco, M. (2016). The Sharing Economy Revolution and Peer-to-peer
Online Platforms. The Case of Airbnb. In: Borangiu, T., Dragoicea, M., Nóvoa, H. (eds): Exploring
Services Science. Springer, Cham, 561–570.
Midgett, C., Bendickson, J. S., Muldon, J. & Solomon, S. J. (2017). The sharing economy and
sustainability: A case for Airbnb. Small Business Institute Journal, 13(2), 51-71.
Mody, M. A., Suess, C. & Lehto, X. (2017). The accommodation experiencescape: a comparative
assessment of hotels and Airbnb. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
62, 2377–2404.
Möhlmann, M. (2015). Collaborative Consumption: Determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of
using a sharing economy option again. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14(3), 193–207.
Mosteller, F. & Tukey, J. W. (1977). Data analysis and regression. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co,
Reading.
Murillo, D., Buckland, H. & Vai, E. (2017). When the sharing economy becomes neoliberalism on
steroids: Unraveling the controversies. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 125, 66-76.
Neeser. D., Peitz, M. & Stuhler, J. (2015). Does Airbnb Hurt Hotel Business: Evidence from the Nordic
Countries. URL: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/publications/
master_thesis_airbnb.pdf (Accessed 10.10.2018).
OCU (2016). Collaboration or Business? Collaborative Consumption: From Value for users to a Society
with Values. OCU Ediciones SA. URL: http://www.oneplanetnetwork.org/sites/default/files/
collaboration_or_business_cc_p2p_2016.pdf (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Olmedilla, M., Martínez-Torres, M.R. & Toral, S. L. (2016). Harvesting Big Data in social science: A
methodological approach for collecting online user-generated content. Computer Standards &
Interfaces, 46, 79–87.
Önder, I., Weismayer, C. & Gunter, U. (2018). Spatial price dependencies between the traditional
accommodation sector and the sharing economy. Tourism Economics, 1–17.
Oskam, J. & Boswijk, A. (2016). Airbnb: The future of networked hospitality business. Journal of Tourism
Futures, 2(1), 22–42.
Perez-Sanchez, V. R., Serrano-Estrada, L., Marti, P. & Mora-Garcia, R-T. (2018). The what, where, and
why of Airbnb price determinants. Sustainability, 10, 1-31.
Pew Research Center (2016). Shared, Collaborative and on Demand: The New Digital Economy. URL:
http://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2016/05/PI_2016.05.19_Sharing-
Economy_FINAL.pdf (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Pizam, A. (2014). Peer-to-peer travel: Blessing or blight? International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 38, 118–119.
Puczkó, L. & Rátz, T. (2000). Tourist and Resident Perceptions of the Physical Impacts of Tourism at
Lake Balaton, Hungary: Issues for Sustainable Tourism Management. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
8(6), 458–478.
PWC (2015a). Five steps to success in the sharing economy. URL: http://www.pewresearch.org/wp-
content/uploads/sites/9/2016/05/PI_2016.05.19_Sharing-Economy_FINAL.pdf (Accessed10.10.2018).
PWC (2015b). The Sharing Economy. URL: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/industry/entertainment-
media/publications/consumer-intelligence-series/assets/pwc-cis-sharing-economy.pdf (Accessed
10.10.2018).
16
Quattrone, G., Proserpio, D., Quercia, D., Capra, L. & Musolesi, M. (2016). Who benefits from the
“sharing” economy of Airbnb? Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide
Web. 1385–1394.
Ranjbari, M., Morales-Alonso, G. & Carrasco-Gallego, R. (2018). Conceptualizing the Sharing Economy
through Presenting a Comprehensive Framework. Sustainability, 10(7), 1–24.
Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition.
Journal of Political Economy, 82(1), 34–55.
Samaan, R. (2015). Airbnb, rising rent, and the housing crisis in Los Angeles. URL:
http://www.laane.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/AirBnB-Final.pdf (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Schamel, G. (2012). Weekend vs. midweek stays: Modeling hotel room rates in a small market.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1113–1118.
Smith, M. K., Egedy, T., Csizmady, A., Jancsik, A., Olt, G. & Michalkó, G. (2018). Non-planning and
tourism consumption in Budapest’s inner city. Tourism Geographies, 20(3), 524–548.
Statista (2018). Leading hotel brands based on brand value worldwide in 2017 (in billion U.S. dollars).
URL: https://www.statista.com/statistics/732907/most-valuable-hotel-brands-worldwide/
(Accessed 10.10.2018).
Sung, E., Kim, H. & Lee, D. (2018). Why Do People Consume and Provide Sharing Economy
Accommodation? – A Sustainability Perspective. Sustainability, 10(6), 2–17.
Teubner, T., Hawlitschek, F. & Dann, D. (2017). Price determinants on Airbnb: How reputation pays off
in the sharing economy. Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics, 5(4), 53–80.
Teubner, T., Saade, N., Hawlitschek, F. & Weinhardt, C. (2016). It’s only pixels, badges, and stars: On
the economic value of reputation on Airbnb. Australasian Conference on Information Systems,
Wollongong, Australia. URL: https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1055&context=
acis2016 (Accessed 10.10.2018).
Thrane, C. (2007). Examining the determinants of room rates for hotels in capital cities: the Oslo
experience. Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, 5(4), 315–323.
Törzsök, A., Galambos, I., Gonda, T. & Csapó, J. (2017). A Balaton vendégforgalmának fejlődése a két
világháború között. (The Development of Guest Flow at Lake Balaton Between the Two World Wars)
Területi Statisztika, 57(6), 665–685.
Tussyadiah, I. P. (2015). An Exploratory Study on Drivers and Deterrents of Collaborative Consumption
of Travel. In: Tussyadiah, I. P., Inversini, A. (eds.): Information and Communication Technologies in
Tourism 2015. Springer, Cham. 817–830.
Tussyadiah, I. P. & Pesonen, J. (2016). Impacts of Peer-to-Peer Accommodation Use on Travel Patterns.
Journal of Travel Research, 55(8), 1022–1040.
Tussyadiah, I. P. & Zach, F. (2017). Identifying salient attributes of peer-to-peer accommodation
experience. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 34(5), 636–652.
Van der Borg, J., Camatti, N., Bertocchi, D. & Albarea, A. (2017). The Rise of Sharing Economy in
Tourism: Airbnb Attributes for the Veneto Region. University Ca' Foscari of Venice, Dept. of
Economics Research Paper Series No. 05/WP/2017. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2997985
(Accessed 10.10.2018).
Wachsmuth, D. & Weisler, A. (2018). Airbnb and rent gap: Gentrification through the sharing economy.
Environment and Planning A, 50(6), 1147–1170.
Wang, C. & Jeong, M. (2018). What makes you choose Airbnb again? An examination of users’
perceptions toward the website and their stay. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 74,
162–170.
Wang, D., Li, M., Guo, P. & Xu, W. (2016). The impact of sharing economy on the diversification of
tourist products: Implication for tourist experience. In: Inversini, A., Schegg, R. (eds.): Information
and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2016. Springer, Cham. 695–708.
17
Wang, D. & Nicolau, J. L. (2017). Price determinants of sharing economy based accommodation rental:
A study of listings from 33 cities on Airbnb. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 62,
120–131.
Xie, K. L. & Kwok, L. (2017). The effects of Airbnb’s price positioning on hotel performance. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 67, 174–184.
Yang, Y., Mueller, N. J. & Croes, R. R. (2016). Market accessibility and hotel prices in the Caribbean: The
moderating effect of quality-signaling factors. Tourism Management, 56, 40–51.
Zervas, G., Proserpio, D. & Byers, J. (2017). The Rise of the Sharing Economy: Estimating the Impact of
Airbnb on the Hotel Industry. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(5), 687–705.
Zhang, H., Zhang, J., Lu, S., Cheng, S. & Zhang, J. (2011a). Modeling hotel room price with geographically
weighted regression. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), 1036–1043.
Zhang, Z., Chen, R. J. C., Han, L. D. & Yang, L. (2017). Key Factors Affecting the Price of Airbnb Listings:
A Geographically Weighted Approach. Sustainability, 9(9), 1–13.
Zhang, Z., Ye, Q. & Law, R. (2011b). Determinants of hotel room price – An exploration of travelers’
hierarchy of accommodation needs. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
23(7), 972–981.
18
An extended model of destination image formation:
The inclusion of sensory images
Bình Nghiêm-Phú 1* and Awangku Hassanal Bahar Pengiran Bagul 2
1
School of Economics and Management, University of Hyogo. 8-2-1 Gakuennishimachi, Nishi-ku, Kobe, Hyogo 651-
2197 Japan. E-mail: binhnghiem@gmail.com
2 Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy, Universiti Malaysia Sabah Jalan UMS, 88400, Kota Kinabalu,
Sabah, Malaysia. E-mail: hbagul@ums.edu.my
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the development of destination image from the sensory form to the
cognitive and affective forms, and the effects that these three types of destination image can have on tourist
intention. Japan’s Tohoku district was selected as the destination, while Malaysia’s respondents were chosen as the
potential tourists. This study proved that the model of destination image formation must begin from the sensory
images and continue with the cognitive images and the affective image. The linear correlations between the
sensory, cognitive and affective elements further facilitate the intention to visit the destination of potential tourists.
Among the three, affective image has the largest effect on intention. However, the formation of the affective image
is under the influence of the sensory and cognitive images, with that of the former to be larger. Implications for
destination image promotion, with an emphasis on the sensory elements, are discussed.
Keywords: auditory, visual, cognitive, affective, Tohoku, Malaysia
Citation: Nghiêm-Phú, B. and Bagul, A.H.B.P. (2020). An extended model of destination image formation: The
inclusion of sensory images. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2411.

RESEARCH NOTE 1
An extended model of destination image formation: The inclusion of sensory images
Introduction
Nowadays, tourists have a great deal of choices of destinations to visit. As a result, destinations have to
compete with one another to win over tourists’ awareness or loyalty. In this competition, certain
destinations have become more attractive than others because they are attached with beautiful
attributes or images. Destination images are created by the direct and indirect activities of destination
managers and marketers, as well as formed through non-commercial sources and personal experiences
(Gartner, 1993). In all cases, the information about a destination must be received by the five senses
(Hultén, Broweus, and van Dijk, 2009; Krishna, 2009). Consequently, the initial perceptions that an
individual has of a destination must be in the sensory form.
Sensory images are the attributes that an individual holds of a destination through seeing (visual),
hearing (auditory), smelling (olfactory), tasting (gustatory) and touching or being touched (tactile).
Compared to the cognitive (the physical and non-physical attributes) and affective (the feelings)
elements, research on the sensory component of destination image has largely been neglected. The
sensory images have only been investigated in the past ten years (Agapito, Pinto, and Mendes, 2017;
Govers, Go, and Kumar, 2007; Huang and Gross, 2010; Son and Pearce, 2005; Xiong, Hashim, and
Murphy, 2015). However, the theoretical frameworks of many studies were insufficiently developed.
Researchers did not make any differentiation between sensory images and cognitive and affective
images. As a consequence, the interpretation and presentation of the sensory images were vague in
terms of what really was perceived. Moreover, the sensory attributes of different places seem to be
similar. In other words, previous studies could not reveal or report the unique aspect of destinations
(Echtner & Ritchie, 2003), which is an important issue in destination image communication.
It should be noted that each sensory image is an individual attribute. The combination of two or more
sensory attributes or cues is a cognitive process (Shams and Seitz, 2008), which results in a cognitive or
integrated image (Compeau, Grewal, and Monroe, 1998). The cognitive component can have further
effects on the formation of the affective component (Baloglu and McCleary, 1999). All of the sensory,
cognitive and affective elements have important influences on tourists’ intention to visit a destination
(Kim and Kerstetter, 2016; Kim and Perdue, 2013; Ramkissoon and Uysal, 2011). However, little research
has been attempted to figure out the whole process of image formation (sensory  cognition  affect)
and the correlation between all the three types of image with tourist intention (sensory  cognition 
affect  intention).
Nowadays, social media, such as Facebook, have firmly established their significant role in the
promotion of destination images in the visual and auditory forms. Conceptually, a visual image is
regarded as a visible physical attribute of or an object found at a destination. In addition, an auditory
image is a sound that can be heard at the destination; this sound should be attached to a given object
or source, such as the sound of sea waves. Regarding their importance, Ghosh and Sarkar (2016) found
that the use of the visual cues, together with the olfactory and tactile cues, could influence the formation
of destination affective image as well as tourist intentions to visit and to recommend the destination.
However, how the visual and auditory images presented on the Facebook page of a destination actually
affect the formation of the cognitive and affective images and tourist intention still remains largely
unknown.
The purpose of this study, therefore, is to examine the development of destination image from the
sensory form to the cognitive and affective forms, and the effects that these three types of destination
image can have on tourist intention. The focus of the study is on the pre-trip formation of destination
image and tourist intention. Thus, this study significantly differs from previous research on sensory
2
Nghiêm-Phú. and Bagul (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2411
image which mainly investigated the on-site or post-trip images (Agapito, Pinto, and Mendes, 2017;
Xiong, Hashim, and Murphy, 2015). Its outcomes are meaningful to the projection of destination images
to influence tourists’ pre-trip intention (i.e., to visit).
Method
Study setting and population
This study chose Tohoku, the North Eastern region of Japan, as the setting due to the mixed nature of
its images. On the one hand, Tohoku possesses many valuable attractions, including natural heritages
(mountains, lakes and hot springs), traditional festivals (Akita’s Namahage and Aomori’s Nebuta), food
and drinks (fruits, rice and sake) and crafts (lacquer). On the other hand, Tohoku has been attached to
the images of a disaster area after the 2011 tsunami and nuclear power plant incidents. The promotion
of the images of such a destination has both the encouraging and restraining aspects which is worth an
investigation.
In recent years, Tohoku is trying its best to recover and redevelop its tourism. For example, an English
Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/TohokuTourism/) has been created to promote the
beautiful images of the region. As of September 2019, the Facebook page had approximately 194,000
likers and followers each. This makes the Tohoku Tourism Facebook page a promising carrier of images
and a busy forum of potential visitors. Considering this reason, this study opted to focus on this
particular platform.
In addition, Malaysian tourists were chosen as the survey population. In 2018, approximately 468,000
tourists from Malaysia visited Japan, making Malaysia one of the top ten inbound markets of Japanese
tourism. Within that population, the younger ones (aged 18-24) were targeted since they are heavy
Facebook users (Statista, 2018). Students at a university in Sabah state were specifically approached
considering the exploratory nature of the research (Arnett, 2008). A general or Facebook-follower
population was also overlooked given the same reason.
Instrument
A structured instrument was developed to collect the necessary data (Appendix). Initially, seventeen
visual attributes and four auditory attributes were gathered from the Tohoku Tourism Facebook page
over a one-year period (April 2016 – March 2017). The content analysis of the page was undertaken twice
in order (1) to capture the most diverse pool of attributes and to ensure the content validity of the
measures (Kassarjian, 1977), and (2) to eliminate the miscalculation and misinterpretation of the
attributes and to guarantee the reliability of the generation process (Given, 2008).
In addition, the three elements of cognitive destination image (functional, psychological and mixed)
were also examined (Echtner & Ritchie, 2003). Specifically, the nineteen measures of the functional
cognitive image were generated from the Tohoku Tourism Website, with a strict reference to the
categorization of attractions displayed on the site. The measures of the psychological cognitive image,
the mixed cognitive image and the affective image (four measures each) were borrowed from the
existing literature (Alcañiz, García, and Blas, 2009; Echtner and Ritchie, 2003; Russell and Pratt, 1980).
Moreover, one measure to capture tourist intention to visit Tohoku was also included in the
questionnaire (Ramkissoon and Uysal, 2011).
The visual and auditory attributes were measured on a five-point scale, from very unimpressive to very
impressive. The cognitive attributes were evaluated on a five-point scale, from very unfavourable to very
favourable. A “don’t know” option was also included. The scale of the four bipolar measures of affective
3
image and the measure of intention was also five-point, with the latter ranging from strongly disagree
to strongly agree. In addition to these measures, the questionnaire also gathered some profile
information of the respondents, including age, sex and previous experiences in Japan.
After being developed, a group of students at a university in Sabah, Malaysia helped answer the
questionnaire, which was written in English, to verify its usability. As a result, the questionnaire was
approved since no issues were detected during the pre-test. An online version of the questionnaire was
then prepared based on the Google Forms application. This version was employed in the main survey.
Data collection and analysis

In the main survey, the participants, who were voluntarily recruited through the lecturers’ and students’
channels at the intended university in Sabah, were gathered in small groups. Initially, the participants
were asked to visit the Facebook page of Tohoku Tourism using their mobile devices. After that, they
were given the link to the online instrument to provide responses to the questions. A series of such
group surveys were implemented between May and July of 2018 to collect a total of 119 valid answers.
Among the 119 respondents, only 4 were below the age of 20 (the remaining were 20 or above) and only
7 have visited Japan before. Seventy three of them are female (61.3%) and 44 are male (37.0%). Two
respondents did not reveal their sexes.
After being generated, the data were analysed in SPSS. The outcomes revealed that the respondents’
perceptions of the attributes of Tohoku were positive. The mean values of the image components ranged
from 3.68 to 4.36 out of 5 points (Appendix). Among them, the auditory image, psychological image,
mixed image and affective image components were singly constructed (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin or KMO >
0.78, p < 0.000). Otherwise, the visual image and the functional image components could be structured
by two factors. However, the two-factor solution requires the deletion of five (visual image) to thirteen
(functional image) items due to the cross-loading issue (Matsunaga, 2010). Therefore, a one-factor
solution was sought for for both the visual image and the functional image components. The KMO
values of 0.92 and 0.94 (p < 0.000) showed that this solution is valid for both components (Leech,
Barrett, and Morgan, 2005).
In all cases, the corrected item-total correlation values of the measures exceeded 0.52 and the
Cronbach’s alphas of the components were larger than 0.82. This pattern suggests that the items of each
component are strongly correlated to one another. Thus, the average value of each component was used
in the verification of the theoretical model. As a consequence, only six measured variables are employed
in the model (visual image, auditory image, functional image, psychological image, affective image and
visit intention). In addition, all the hypothesized correlations among these variables are linear.
Therefore, a hierarchical regression analysis was adopted to verify the model. Moreover, a series of
multiple regression analyses were computed to discover the correlations between pairs of variables.
With a sample of 119 respondents, the subject-to-variable ratio of 19.8 could guarantee a reliable analysis
(Knofczynski and Mundfrom, 2008).
Findings
It was found that the visual image component did not have any significant effects on the three cognitive
image components. However, this sensory component was the significant antecedent of both the
affective image (β = 0.36, p = 0.004) and the visit intention (β = 0.32, p = 0.019). Otherwise, the auditory
image component had significant influences on both the cognitive (β = 0.36 – 0.42, p < 0.05) and the
affective images (β = 0.29, p = 0.021). Yet, it did not affect the intention to visit the destination. Among
the remaining independent variables, only affective image could generate some significant effect on
4
tourists’ intention (β = 0.46, p = 0.000). The whole model was satisfactorily validated: R2 = 0.31, p = 0.000
(Figure 1).
Functional
image
Visual β = 0.37
image β = 0.32 Visit
intention
β = 0.36
Psychological β = 0.48
image β = 0.46
β = 0.42
Affective
Auditory β = 0.29 image
image
β = 0.36 Mixed
image
Note. Insignificant correlations are presented by dash-lines.
Figure 1. Verified model
Discussion
According to the existing literature, visual is the most popular sensory cue (Krishna, 2012; Nghiêm-Phú,
2017). This component is the focus of almost all the advertising and promotion practices. Yet, visual
image probably is the least influential sensory cue (Balaji, Raghavan, and Jha, 2011). The findings of this
study partly support this prior observation. Specifically, visual image did not play any significant role in
the formation of cognitive image (functional, psychological and mixed). Nevertheless, this component
is a significant influencer of affective image and visit intention. This outcome is consistent with the
finding of another study in the context of tourism (Ghosh and Sarkar, 2016).
After visual image, auditory image is another popular component of marketing practices (Krishna, 2012;
Nghiêm-Phú, 2017). The auditory impressions are more important than the visual ones in the formation
of the other image components (cognitive and affective). Yet, when taking tourist behaviour into
account, this sensory component is less significant than the visual image. This outcome, unfortunately,
does not advocate the findings of previous studies (Stafford, 1996; Yalch and Spangenberg, 2000).
Nevertheless, while the prior attempts employed a real setting and focused on daily goods, this study
involves geographical distance and an expected trip. The differences in designs and purposes probably
affect the outcomes of this and the other studies.
5
Alternatively, when combining both the visual and the auditory cues, the outcomes could be improved.
Together these two sensory components could significantly explain 13-16% of the variances of the
cognitive image components and 25-38% of those of the visit intention and the affective image
component. This observation is consistent with findings of previous studies (Balaji, Raghavan, & Jha,
2011; Stephenson & Carter, 2011). In addition, it was found that affective image had the largest effect on
visit intention. This outcome is similar to those found in prior research (Nghiêm-Phú, 2015; Zhang, Fu,
Cai, and Lu, 2014).
Theoretical implications
Destination image is indeed a multidimensional construct (Echtner and Ritchie, 2003). Yet, destination
image does not only have the cognitive and affective dimensions but also the five sensory elements
(Baloglu and McCleary, 1999; Echtner and Ritchie, 2003; Son and Pearce, 2005). While previous studies
have often treated these dimensions and elements separately, this study empirically proved that the
model of destination image formation must begin from the sensory images and continue with the
cognitive and affective images. The linear correlations between the sensory, cognitive and affective
elements further facilitate the intention to visit the destination of potential tourists. Among the three,
affective image has the largest effect on intention. However, the formation of the affective image is
under the influence of the sensory and cognitive images, with that of the former to be larger. (It should
be noted that the combined effect of sensory and cognitive images is larger than that of the individual
effect of each image component.) Thus, as the most fundamental forms of information input, sensory
images should be thoroughly understood and employed in the management and marketing of tourist
destinations.
Fortunately, the development of social media platforms such as Facebook has sufficiently supported the
promotional efforts of destination managers and marketers. In addition to being an interactive platform
(direct connections between or among providers and users), social media also are a multisensory
environment (visual and auditory). The employment of social media in marketing helps sufficiently
promote the sensory attributes of the destination, create the more complexed cognitive and affective
impressions, and strengthen the intention to visit of potential tourists. The multisensory approach of
sensory marketing (Hultén, Broweus, and van Dijk, 2009), thus, has successfully been applied.
Managerial implications
Findings of this study advocate the application of the sensory marketing approach in promoting the
images of tourism destinations. Specifically, both the visual and auditory forms of destination attributes
should be employed in promotional practices, especially those implemented on social media platforms.
The more positive that the sensory images are perceived, the better the cognitive and affective images
are, and the stronger the visit intention is.
With Tohoku tourism, more auditory cues should be promoted on the Facebook page in addition to the
current festival-related ones, such as Tsugaru shamisen music, festival attendants’ laughter and shouts,
and festival music. Fortunately, auditory cues can be simulated or created to carry other sensory
impressions (visual, olfactory, gustatory and tactile). This advantage should be further exploited. In
addition, certain visual attributes could be promoted in a more frequent manner (those with higher
factor loadings). Among them, some may be communicated seasonally (snow kamakura and pink cherry
blossoms), while some could be utilized the whole year-round (blue sky and water, lantern and straw
sandals). Unfortunately, such attributes could not exclusively represent the Tohoku region. In other
words, they could be found anywhere in Japan. Tohoku’s unique attributes (Namahage and Neputa
characters), however, are not considered as important as the other common ones (lower factor
6
loadings). Therefore, more efforts should be attempted to promote such uniqueness of Tohoku tourism,
especially on social media platforms and other Internet-based portals (e.g., website).
Conclusion
Destination image is no doubt a complicated concept and construct. With the inclusion of the sensory
elements, the model of destination image formation is now extended as follows: sensory  cognition
 affect. Among the three, affective image is the most important antecedent of visit intention. Yet,
affective image receives more influences from sensory images than from cognitive images.
Consequently, more emphasis should be put on the presentation and promotion of the sensory elements
of destination image, especially on the multisensory environment of social media platforms.
However, several limitations should be taken into account, and certain directions for future studies
could be considered. First, the population of the study is not representative. The outcomes, thus, cannot
be generalized to the whole inbound tourist market of Tohoku tourism. To attain this goal, future
studies could enlarge the scale of the survey to include tourists from other markets and other age or
occupation segments. Second, the sample of this study is rather small and the aim of the analysis is
exploratory. The study, therefore, could not assess the relative importance of each image item. To solve
this issue, future studies could generate a bigger sample and use the structural equation modelling
technique to reveal the contribution of each attribute and the mutual constraints from other image
components. Third, the perceptions of the Facebook-follower community were overlooked. In other
words, the medium- to long-term exposure to the visual images and sounds displayed on the Facebook
page was not taken into account. In the future, an examination or comparison among the short-,
medium- and long-term exposures to Facebook information is also recommended. Fourth, the negative
images of Tohoku and those circulated by social media users were not under examination. Thus, the
impacts of the negative images on the visit intention and the relationship between the positive images
and the visit intention remain unknown. These issues may also be further explored in the future.
In addition to the abovementioned directions, certain exploratory findings of this study could also be
re-examined in future research. For example, are auditory cues really more powerful than visual images?
If it is the case, which ways should be done to auditorise the other sensory cues? Similarly, are sensory
images really more significant than cognitive images in the formation of the affective image? If the
answer is yes, which components of cognitive image could be retained in and which could be excluded
from future promotional efforts? Answers to these questions will help expand the understanding of
destination image, one of the most important concepts in destination management and marketing.
7
Appendix. Description of variables
Mean Corrected item-total Factor

correlation loading
Visual image 4.36 Cronbach’s alpha = 0.95
Blue sky 4.40 0.73 0.76
Blue water 4.38 0.71 0.74
Bonfire 4.14 0.73 0.74
Colorful flowers 4.58 0.71 0.73
Fireworks 4.24 0.67 0.67
Greenery 4.49 0.72 0.75
Lantern 4.24 0.73 0.74
Namahage monster characters 4.14 0.67 0.67
Neputa characters/models 4.19 0.61 0.61
Old wooden/straw walls/roofs 4.38 0.67 0.69
Pink cherry blossom 4.55 0.75 0.78
Red lacquer 4.31 0.77 0.78
Red/yellow leaves 4.36 0.69 0.71
Snow kamakura 4.46 0.76 0.79
Straw sandals 4.24 0.71 0.73
Traditional costumes 4.50 0.69 0.72
White snow 4.49 0.69 0.71
Auditory image 4.37 Cronbach’s alpha = 0.82
Festival attendants’ laughter/shouts 4.33 0.63 0.80
Festival music 4.39 0.60 0.77
Tsugaru shamisen music 4.29 0.72 0.86
The sound of waterfalls 4.46 0.62 0.79
Functional image 3.68 Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97
Aquariums 2.92 0.61 0.61
Art centers/museums 3.47 0.78 0.78
Castles 3.50 0.77 0.78
Caves 3.24 0.77 0.78
Forest 3.62 0.75 0.76
Historical towns 3.81 0.83 0.85
Hot springs 3.84 0.84 0.86
Lakes 3.68 0.78 0.80
Local crafts 3.67 0.86 0.87
Local markets 3.75 0.85 0.87
Local specialty cuisines 3.76 0.80 0.82
Mountains 4.11 0.81 0.82
Natural parks 4.08 0.85 0.87
Sake 3.18 0.74 0.75
Sea 4.00 0.85 0.86
Shrines/temples 3.55 0.80 0.81
Snow resorts 3.76 0.84 0.85
Traditional festivals 4.02 0.75 0.77
Traditional performances 3.90 0.70 0.72
Psychological image 3.88 Cronbach’s alpha = 0.91
Exoticness 3.58 0.71 0.82
Hospitality 3.97 0.85 0.92
Reputation 3.97 0.80 0.89
Service quality 3.98 0.84 0.91
Mixed image 4.05 Cronbach’s alpha = 0.94
Accessibility 3.88 0.86 0.92
Cleanliness 4.29 0.83 0.90
Convenience 4.03 0.85 0.92
Safety 4.00 0.91 0.95
8
Affective image 4.14 Cronbach’s alpha = 0.81

Unpleasant - Pleasant 4.18 0.65 0.82
Sleepy - Arousing 4.06 0.66 0.83
Distressing - Relaxing 4.17 0.67 0.83
Gloomy - Exciting 4.15 0.52 0.71
Intention
Intention to visit 4.54
References
Agapito, D., Pinto, P., & Mendes, J. (2017). Tourists’ memories, sensory impressions and loyalty: In loco
and post-visit study in Southwest Portugal. Tourism Management, 58, 108-118.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.015
Alcañiz, E. B., García, I. S., & Blas, S. S. (2009). The functional-psychological continuum in the cognitive
image of a destination: A confirmatory analysis. Tourism Management, 30(5), 715-723.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.10.020
Balaji, M. S., Raghavan, S., & Jha, S. (2011). Role of tactile and visual inputs in product evaluation: A
multisensory perspective. Asia Paciﬁc Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 23(4), 13-530.
https://doi.org/10.1108/1355585111116
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism
Research, 26(4), 868-897. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00030-4
Compeau, L. D., Grewal, D., & Monroe, K. B. (1998). Role of prior affect and sensory cues on consumers’
affective and cognitive responses and overall perceptions of quality. Journal of Business Research,
42(3), 295-308. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00126-4
Echtner, C. M., & Ritchie, J. R. (2003). The meaning and measurement of destination image. The Journal
of Tourism Studies, 14(1), 37-48.
Gartner, W. (1993). Image formation process. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 2(2/3), 191-215.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J073v02n02_12
Ghosh, T., & Sarkar, A. (2016). “To feel a place of heaven”: Examining the role of sensory reference cues
and capacity for imagination in destination marketing. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(1),
25-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2014.997962
Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Govers, R., Go, F. M., & Kumar, K. (2007). Virtual destination image – A new measurement approach.
Annals of Tourism Research, 34(4), 977-997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2007.06.00
Huang, S., & Gross, M. J. (2010). Australia’s destination image among Mainland Chinese travelers: An
exploratory study. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(1), 63-81.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10548400903534923
Hultén, B., Broweus, N., & van Dijk, M. (2009). Sensory marketing. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kassarjian, H. H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(1), 8-
18. https://doi.org/10.1086/208674
Kim, D., & Perdue, R. R. (2013). The effects of cognitive, affective, and sensory attributes on hotel choice.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 246-257.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.05.012
Kim, J., & Kerstetter, D. L. (2016). Multisensory processing impacts on destination image and willingness
to visit. International Journal of Tourism Research, 18(1), 52-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2032
Knofczynski, G. T., & Mundfrom, D. (2008). Sample sizes when using multiple linear regression for
prediction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(3), 431-442.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164407310131
9
Krishna, A. (2009). Cognition and sensory perception: The impact of input from sensory modalities on
imagery, memory, information processing, and sensory perception (Symposium summary).
Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 127-130.
Krishna, A. (2012). An integrative review of sensory marketing: Engaging the senses to affect perception,
judgment and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 332-351.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.003
Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and
interpretation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Matsunaga, M. (2010). How to factor-analyze your data right: Do’s, don’ts, and how-to’s. International
Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 97-110.
Nghiêm-Phú, B. (2015). A confirmation of the four-component structure of destination image, and their
relationships with tourists’ loyalty. European Journal of Tourism Research, 11, 147-153.
Nghiêm-Phú, B. (2017). Sensory marketing in an outdoor out-store shopping environment – an
exploratory study in Japan. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 29(5), 994-1016.
https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-09-2016-0178
Ramkissoon, H., & Uysal, M. S. (2011). The effects of perceived authenticity, information search behavior,
motivation and destination imagery on cultural behavioral intentions of tourists. Current Issues in
Tourism, 14(6), 537-562. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2010.493607
Russell, J. A., & Pratt, G. (1980). A description of the affective quality attributed to environments. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(2), 311-322. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.311
Shams, L., & Seitz, A. R. (2008). Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(11),
411-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.006
Son, A., & Pearce, P. (2005). Multi-faceted image assessment: International students’ views of Australia
as a tourist destination. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 18(4), 21–35.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J073v18n04_02
Stafford, M. R. (1996). Tangibility in services advertising: An investigation of verbal versus visual cues.
Journal of Advertising, 25(3), 13-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1996.10673504
Statista. (2018). Distribution of Facebook users worldwide as of July 2018, by age and gender. Statista:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/376128/facebook-global-user-age-distribution/ (Accessed on
31.08.2018).
Stephenson, J., & Carter, M. (2011). Use of multisensory environments in schools for students with severe
disabilities: Perceptions from schools. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental
Disabilities, 46(2), 276-290.
Xiong, J., Hashim, N. H., & Murphy, J. (2015). Multisensory image as a component of destination image.
Tourism Management Perspectives, 14, 34-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.03.001
Yalch, R. F., & Spangenberg, E. R. (2000). The effects of music in a retail setting on real and perceived
shopping times. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 139-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-
2963(99)00003-X
Zhang, H., Fu, X., Cai, L. A., & Lu, L. (2014). Destination image and tourist loyalty: A meta-analysis.
Tourism Management, 40, 213-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.06.006
Coordinating editor: Giacomo del Chiappa
10
The joy of riding or walk of shame?
The theme park experience of obese people
Yaniv Poria 1*, Jeremy Beal 2 and Arie Reichel 3
1
Department of Hotel and Tourism Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Guilford Glazer Faculty of
Business and Management, Be’er-Sheva, Israel 8410501. E-mail: yporia@som.bgu.ac.il
2 Hospitality and Tourism Management, Virginia Tech, Virginia, USA
3 Department of Hotel and Tourism Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Guilford Glazer Faculty of
Business and Management, Be’er-Sheva, Israel 8410501
Abstract
This exploratory study focuses on obese people’s perceptions of their theme park experience. Given this study’s
objective and the gap in the literature on obese people’s tourist experience, a qualitative research approach was
adopted. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted. Participants revealed that their theme park
experiences included a strong sense of humiliation. This is clearly associated with the interaction between their
body, the physical environment and most importantly the human environment. Managerial implications are
suggested.
Keywords: theme-park; obesity
Citation: Poria, Y., Beal, J. and Reichel, A. (2020). The joy of riding or walk of shame? The theme park experience
of obese people. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2412.

RESEARCH NOTE 1
The joy of riding or walk of shame? The theme-park experience of obese people
Introduction and literature review

More and more tourism scholars have been increasingly interested in the accessibility of
disenfranchised segments of the population, whose physical characteristics hinder their tourist and
leisure experiences. This interest is a response both to legal regulations and to societal recognition that
tourism and mobility should be recognized as a social right. Obese people are not usually foremost in
mind when discussing physical disabilities. Yet, these individuals face difficulties in many public places.
This exploratory research focuses on their theme-park experience.
In 2011-2014, obese people made up some 36.5% of the adult population in the USA (Ogden et al., 2015),
and current trends indicate that this rate is on the rise (Fitzpatrick et al. 2018). The International
Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions (IAAPA) reports that there are more than 400 major
theme parks and amusement parks and attractions in the USA, and about 300 in Europe, hosting 375
million and 161 million visitors annually, respectively (http://www.iaapa.org/resources/by-park-
type/amusement-parks-and-attractions/industry-statistics). If the proportion of obese visitors to theme
parks matches that of the general population, then one third of all visitors are obese. To date,
surprisingly, researchers and park administrators have paid little attention to this rapidly growing
segment of their visitors.
While there are numerous studies on theme or amusement parks (e.g. Slåtten, Krogh, & Connolley, 2011;
Wakefield & Blodgett, 1994), there seems to be a gap in the understanding of the nature of the visit
experience of people whose body might be a barrier to full enjoyment and participation. This
corresponds with the ongoing attention to the study of the body in tourism and hospitality (Crouch,
2000; Harris & Small, 2013; Pons, 2003; Pritchard & Morgan, 2011; Veijola & Jokinen, 1994).
Bitner (1992) identified three dimensions of the theme park experience which could assist in
contextualising the barriers to its experience: visitors’ initiative to participate, experience with fellow
visitors, and interaction with the staff. As these dimensions involve both the personal and the
interpersonal spheres, and with studies focusing on the accessibility of marginalized segments in mind,
this study uses a holistic approach that emphasizes the significance of people’s emotions, self-respect,
and self-perceptions (Darcy, 2010; Poria & Beal, 2016).
The apparent gap in studies concerning obese visitors could be attributed to an overall lack of
recognition, in research and the industry, of the role of visitors’ body and physical appearance in shaping
the tourist experience (Berdychevsky, Poria, & Uriely, 2013). This, despite the fact that elements such as
one’s body and the social stigma it may carry, are highly recognized when conceptualizing human
behaviour.
Research objective
This exploratory study was guided by two objectives: first, to highlight the onsite theme park
experiences of obese people and, second, to identify ways to overcome the hurdles and barriers they
confront. The focus on obese people stems from their current proportion in the population, and more
so, from indications that obesity will become more prevalent in the near future. Beyond its effect on
tourism, the present research will also contribute to the broader field of obesity studies by enhancing
our knowledge of the meaning and reality of obese people’s leisure experience (Small & Harris, 2012).
Methodology
Given the exploratory nature of the study as well as the research objectives, a qualitative research
approach was adopted. In-depth semi-structured interviews were utilized as a means to obtain
2
Poria et al. (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2412
subjective accounts and allow for comparisons between participants’ reports. The findings reported
here are part of a larger research project focusing on obese peoples’ tourist experience, conducted in
the USA in Virginia and West Virginia. Initially, 40 people were contacted through Craigslist, and were
offered $20 for their participation; all those who responded ended up participating. For ethical reasons,
participants were not asked about their weight or their BMI, and their definition of obesity or morbid
obesity was by self-report. During the interviews, almost all participants revealed their weight and BMI,
although they had not been asked about. The decision to focus on theme park visits evolved during the
interviews. The interviewer (one of the authors) asked participants to relate to four components of the
tourist experience: hotels, museums, restaurants, and flights. At the end of the interview, participants
were asked to report on other tourism experiences related to their obesity. This procedure is based on
studies elucidating the significant role of remembering noteworthy elements of past vacations,
including unpleasant emotional experiences (Fuchs, Chen, & Pizam, 2015; Torres, Wei, & Hua, 2017), as
well as studies highlighting the importance of memorable moments on the perception of the tourist
experience (Poria, Butler, & Airey, 2007).
Interestingly, of the entire sample (N=40), 14 participants volunteered to share “an additional frustrating
experience”, and all referred to the same issue – theme parks. Some even wondered why they had not
been asked about theme-parks to begin with (“Why did you ask me about museums and not about my
visit to Disneyland?”). In addition, participants mentioned that if asked to compare the various
components of their tourist experience, flights and theme parks would be the worst. The interviews
were inspired by the recognition that the body is a socio-cultural entity inscribed with meaning.
Moreover, it is suggested here that the visit experience is a corporeal experience as well as emotional
one.
Findings
The 14 obese/morbidly obese participants made it clear that visiting theme parks was a major
component of their travel experience, referring almost exclusively to theme parks in the USA, primarily
Disneyland, Disney World and in and around Virginia (e.g. Busch Gardens in Williamsburg).
Interestingly, they revealed that theme parks were often the main – if not the sole reason for travel. For
some, it was ‘a dream come true’. Moreover, it was often part of a long-awaited planned family vacation
for which participants had saved money for long time to cover the high costs.
The interviewees had clear and high expectations of the theme park to be visited. It also became evident
that participants had planned accurately how to experience the site. Ruth commented about her recent
vacation with her two children and husband: ‘…it was me and my two kids. We planned it and dreamt
about it for almost two years. We knew exactly what we were going to do. We knew exactly which rides
we should take. When will we eat, when does the show begin. Everything. You have to know, it is a very
expensive vacation for us. We were all so excited – my kids, myself and even my husband.’
Theme park issues

The content analysis of the responses highlighted several noteworthy issues. All but one of the 14
participants in the obese/morbidly obese group complained about the long distances between park
attractions, the long queues, and the “endless waiting time for each ride.” The interviews revealed that
the participants’ physical condition resulted in mobility difficulties, which, in turn, caused frustration
and fatigue. Participants argued that due to their weight and size ‘…it is extremely difficult to move
between the park’s various attractions or to stand on line’. Some voiced their frustration that obesity is
not formally classified as a disability. Therefore, they could not use the special line for people with
disabilities or the golf carts. However, the main concern that all participants shared and expressed was
3
their strong feeling of humiliation, caused mainly by their inability to experience a ride (due to the small
seats or too-short seatbelts), and by the insult of being asked to leave the line – all in front of other
visitors.
The content analysis clearly showed that the participants were greatly embarrassed by the attraction
operators’ request that they leave the line in order not to block the next visitors. This request was
especially embarrassing when made in front of their children. Participants used words such as
“humiliating,” “embarrassing,” “devastating,” and “I wanted to cry.” Dana said, “I felt the world was
shattering… and all of it in front of my kids. I was devastated.” Moreover, this is especially difficult when
children are not allowed on a ride unless accompanied by a parent, or when the children wanted to take
the ride with the parents only. Clearly, these highly memorable humiliating moments are crucial for the
understanding of the painful theme park experience of obese people.
The findings indicate that the reported experience might cast a long shadow onto the future.
Participants stated that their humiliating experiences tainted their theme park visit with hard-to-heal
wounds, some going so far as to claim that “it ruined our vacation”. To aggravate the situation, some
participants felt that bystanders seemed to be happy seeing them and their children barred from the
ride, being punished for their intentional choice to be obese. Interviewees felt that bystanders’ facial
expressions indicated that it was socially acceptable, judicious, and even commendable to punish obese
people, by expulsion from the line: “they view us as people who made a choice to be obese, so treated
us like people who chose to be disabled and enjoy government support paid for by ordinary working
people’s taxes”.
Obese people’s feeling that others view them as “thieves”, was a shameful and humiliating experience
that lingered on as a painful memory. Thus, the joy of ride turns into a public walk of shame.
Summary
The findings indicate the theme park experience is highly affected by obese peoples’ look and body size.
Their body determines their interaction with the physical and human environments, creating a
physically challenging and mentally humiliating visitor experience. The physical environment is
challenging for obese people. It calls upon them to cover considerable distances, and this entails great
effort. The restrictive park regulations have a major effect on obese people’s park experience, an effect
that has not yet been documented in tourism studies. At the core of the experience is participants’
perception that the bystanders who watched and stared at them when asked to leave, considered the
request to be a mark justice made. The ensuing sense of humiliation was highly devastating. The
findings indicate that people’s appearances should be considered when conceptualizing the tourist
experience, especially the theme park experience. The findings suggest that obesity should be
approached as a “social disability” which might be more punitive and restrictive than physical disability.
In other words, it is the social arena that may create long-term negative memories rather than the
physical attributes of the site.
The findings highlight that accessibility should be conceptualised not only in terms of the individual’s
ability to move from one point to another, but also in terms of respect and acceptance by others. Relying
on previous studies, it is suggested in line with the neo-liberal approach (Small & Harris, 2012; Small,
Harris, & Wilson, 2008) that one’s physical body should be approached as a social construct crucial to
the understanding of the tourist experience.
4
Poria et al. (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2412
Implications
Several simple, yet effective, inexpensive and easy to implement managerial implications arise from this
exploratory study. Obese people could be advised to use the line for people with disabilities, and be
offered golf carts to facilitate greater mobility. The humiliation felt at ride’s embarkation point can be
easily solved via expectations management. Theme park visitors should be informed prior to ticket
purchase and arrival about the ‘servicescape’ limitations. Just as there are age and height limits for some
rides, clear information should also be posted about weight or body size. This is especially significant
when a parent is obese and is barred from a ride, the impact on the family is devastating. Services for
obese people, as well as restrictions, should be clearly posted on the park website.
Ride operators should be instructed on how to handle sensitive situations with obese people. In
addition, as one of the interviewees suggested, a designated area of the park could display the various
rides’ seats, so that people can see in advance whether a particular ride is suited for their body size.
The management of theme parks could consider providing obese people with a booklet of coupons only
for the rides they can use, rather than the common all-inclusive expensive pass, offering a lower
entrance fee. In addition, since obese people find it difficult to walk long distances, it is possible to
provide them with extended period of ticket validity. Park management should also consider the
possibility of designating service employees to escort children of obese parents in restricted rides. All
these suggestions also apply to people using wheelchairs or crutches.
Obese people should be aware that due to their physical limitations they will not be able to fully enjoy
the park, and this may also impact their children. A way to better plan the visit may be by contacting
other obese people who have been to theme parks. In other words, pro-active planning may enhance
their theme-park experience and adjust expectations level.
Finally, we must bear in mind that many theme parks and attractions were designed and constructed
more than fifty years ago, and there has been a significant increase in people’s weight and size since
then (Pozza & Isidori, 2018). New theme parks and attractions should be planned to accommodate these
changes. For example, roller coasters, often cited by interviewees as a major disappointing experience
as participants could not be buckled up, should be equipped with longer, more flexible seat belts.
Finally, one of the interviewees suggested to examine the possibility to install ‘adjustable seats’ for
different people’s sizes (‘small seats for kids, big seats for the parents’). In line with previous studies,
this could be relevant also to the airline industry (Poria & Beal, 2016).
Limitation and future research

This exploratory study focuses on a small group of American interviewees, from a limited geographical
area. Future studies in other locations may reveal different experiences. In addition, this study was
conducted after the visit. Future studies conducted on site may provide further insights. The current
study’s emphasis on the social stigma attached to obesity, may encourage further exploration into other
groups of distinct appearance in tourism and leisure servicescapes (e.g., ultra-Orthodox Jews or
religious Muslims). Inspired by the idea of lookism, such studies could assist improving people’s ability
to enjoy tourism and leisure, improving their quality of life. Also, future studies should compare and
contrast between obese people’s perception of their experience and non-obese people’s attitudes and
reactions to obese people.
References
Berdychevsky, L., Poria, Y., & Uriely, N. (2013). Sexual behaviour in women’s tourist experience:
Motivations, behaviours and meanings. Tourism Management, 35, 272-274.
5
Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees.
Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57-71.
Crouch, D. (2000). Places around us: Embodied lay geographies in leisure and tourism. Leisure Studies,
19 (2), 63-76.
Darcy, S. (2010). Inherent complexity: Disability, accessible tourism and accommodation information
preferences. Tourism Management 31(6), 816-826.
Fitzpatrick, K. M., Shi, X., Willis, D. & Niemeier, J. (2018). Obesity and place: Chronic disease in the 500
largest US cities. Obesity Research & Clinical Practice, 12(5), 421-425.
Fuchs, G., Chen, P. J. & Pizam, A. (2015). Are travel purchases more satisfactory than no travel
experiential purchases and material purchases? An exploratory study. Tourism Analysis, 20, 487-497.
Harris, C., & Small, J. (2013). Obesity and hotel staffing: Are hotels guilty of 'lookism'? Hospitality &
Society, 3(2), 111-127.
IAAPA. (2018). http://www.iaapa.org/resources/by-park-type/amusement-parks-and-attractions/
industry-statistics. Retrieved on 30/06/2018.
Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M. D., Fryar, C. D. & Flegal, K. M. (2015). Prevalence of obesity among adults and
youth: United States, 2011-2014. NCHS Data Brief, 219 (1-8).
Pons, P. O. (2003). Being-on-holiday: Tourist dwelling, bodies and place. Tourist Studies, 3(1), 47–66.
Poria, Y. & Beal, J. (2017). An exploratory study about obese people’s flight experience. Journal of Travel
Research, 56, 1-11.
Poria, Y., Butler, R. & Airey, D. (2007). Understanding tourism – Memorable moments in a complex
timeframe. Asian Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 1, 25-38.
Pozza C. & Isidori A. M. (2018). What’s behind the obesity epidemic. In A. Laghi & M. Rengo (Eds.),
Imaging in bariatric surgery (pp. 1-8). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. (2011). Tourist bodies, transformation and sensuality. In P. Bramham & S.
Wagg (Eds.), The new politics of leisure and pleasure (pp. 153-168). New York, NY: Palgrave.
Slåtten, T., Krogh, C. & Connolley, S. (2011). Make it memorable: Customer experiences in winter
amusement parks. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 5(1), 80-91.
Small, J., & Harris, C. (2012). Obesity and tourism: Rights and responsibilities. Annals of Tourism
Research, 39(2), 686-707.
Small, J., Harris, C., & Wilson, E. (2008). A critical discourse analysis of in-flight magazine
advertisements: The ‘‘social sorting’’ of airline travellers? Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 6,
17-38.
Torres, E. N., Wei, W. & Hua, N. (2017). Towards understanding the effects of time and emotions on the
vacation experience. Tourism Review, 72 (4), 357-374.
Veijola, S., & Jokinen, E. (1994). The body in tourism. Theory, Culture & Society, 11(3), 125-151.
Wakefield, K. L. & Blodgett, J. G. (1994). The importance of servicescapes in leisure service settings.
Journal of Services Marketing, 8(3), 66-76.
6
Relational dynamics of high-level gastronomy in tourism
Natalia Daries Ramón 1*
1
Department Business Management, University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain. C/Jaume II, 73, CP. 25001, Lleida, Spain
E-mail: ndaries@aegern.udl.cat
Supervisor: Dr. Berta Ferrer Rosell

Dr. Estela Mariné Roig
Institution awarding the Ph. D. Degree: University of Lleida, Spain
Date of defence: 13 July 2018
Citation: Daries, N. (2020). Relational dynamics of high-level gastronomy in tourism. Doctoral Dissertation
Summary. European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2413.

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION SUMMARY 1

Goal and objectives of the dissertation

The restaurant industry has undergone a huge boom in the last decade and is considered an important
component of the tourism industry (Sánchez-Cañizares & López-Guzmán, 2012). In this context,
attracting culinary tourists has become the goal of many destinations since they tend to stay at the
destination longer, thereby increasing tourist spending (UNWTO, 2017). Gastronomy has been found
to be a fundamental attraction factor of a destination and an element of its image, which is most evenly
recognised across different types of destinations (Hjalager & Corigliano, 2000). The reasons travellers
choose a particular destination differ, but new tourism trends indicate that quality cuisine is becoming
increasingly relevant to the process of choosing a destination and the construction of the destination’s
image (Lai, Khoo-Lattimore, & Wang, 2017).
The goal of this thesis is to analyse the relational dynamics of high-level gastronomy between
customers, destinations, and the environment at technological and social levels. To reach this objective,
the research project has been broken down into four sub-objectives, each addressed in a separate article:
 To determine in-depth the profile of high-level restaurant visitors, i.e., how they behave at a
gastronomic, touristic, and technological level before, during, and after a visit to a restaurant;
 To establish whether high-level restaurants are in fact tourist resources capable of creating and
attracting tourist flows, or if they are simply complementary activities;
 To create a model to check the extent to which high-level restaurant websites are adapted to
information and communication technologies (ICT), e-commerce, and to the demands of
current customers regarding the content and use of ICT in planning and booking services;
 To analyse the behaviour and priorities of high-level gastronomy customers to determine if
today's society pays more attention to the reputation of these types of restaurants, or if
customers are simply looking to enjoy the gastronomic experience.
Methodology
In order to achieve the objectives of the thesis, three models have been proposed.
The first model is capable of quantifying the importance of single tourist attractions as a nucleus, their
interactions and motivation with push factors, the surroundings and the destination and how strong
they are. The second model is proposed to analyse the effects on tourists’ intentions to return and
recommend this type of experience to others. The third model consists of a progressive analysis of the
restaurants’ websites, which starts with a content analysis and continues with the application of the
extended model of Internet commerce adoption (eMICA) to identify each website’s level of maturity. It
ends with the integration of both previous methods using principal component analysis.
To apply these models, an empirical study was conducted with a sample of 1,500 travellers who visited
Michelin-starred restaurants. A self-administered (online) questionnaire was used to collect data from
visitors from July to December 2017, and the link to the questionnaire was posted on Facebook
groups/pages with high numbers of followers. The main analyses performed with these data were logit
analysis (model one) and structural equation modelling (model two).
In regard to the third model, a total of 980 websites for restaurants with Michelin stars in Spain, France
and Italy were analysed, based on the 2016 Michelin Guide. The analyses consisted of checking whether
the websites accomplished the e-MICA model phases and layers, as well as checking which contents of
the four web-content analysis dimensions (information, interaction, e-commerce and additional
2
Daries (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2413
functions) the websites present. Data collection was conducted in April 2017. The main analyses
performed are analysis of variance and principal component analysis.
Results
Regarding the first objective, we discovered two different segments of tourists. The first group of tourists
included those who visit a top-level restaurant as the main motivation for their trip. The second group
were primarily motivated by the destination itself. Both groups valued both their experience of the
destination and their gastronomic experience. Individuals in the two segments displayed different
behaviour in terms of the status they perceived by visiting a top-level restaurant and their post-purchase
recommendations and intention to return.
The analysis showed that certain customer segments were pushed by different motivations, and these
motivations affected the importance that the nucleus gave them as an attraction factor (second
objective). The application of the model also showed that gastronomy was not merely an external pull
factor related to destinations, but also that the taste for and enjoyment of gastronomic experiences were
important motivations for travellers.
Regarding relational dynamics and the development and maturity of restaurant websites (third
objective), results of the evaluation revealed that 10% of the selected Michelin restaurants do not
currently have a presence on the Net or their presence is completely static. The remaining 90% of high-
quality restaurants analysed were found to be aware of the importance of being present on the Web, as
most have access to the Internet and a website. The Michelin restaurant websites generally displayed a
medium level of interactivity. However, fewer than 30% allowed the entire purchasing process to be
completed via the Internet. The results further suggest that these restaurants in France, Italy, and Spain
could be left behind in their development and use of the Internet compared to other sectors such as
accommodation, travel agencies, and airlines. We can therefore say that they are not taking advantage
of the opportunities that the Web presents as a viable tool for promotion. In addition, the results of the
study provide us with information on the differing states of progress according to the country where
the restaurant is located. French and Italian restaurants present a greater degree of maturity and
development of content than Spanish restaurants. French restaurants are also more mature and much
more adapted to e-commerce and aware of online security than their Spanish and Italian counterparts.
We also observed cultural differences with respect to content, with the chef being promoted in France,
the name of the restaurant in Spain, and the product in Italy.
Concerning the analysis of relational dynamics (fourth objective), the results were based on the theory
of motivation related to the possibility of obtaining reputation and recognition for consuming high-end
gastronomy as well as the enjoyment of the gastronomic experience. The model showed, on the one
hand, that the degree of perceived reputation of participating in consumption at high-level restaurants
positively influenced intentions to return and recommendations. On the other hand, the degree of the
perceived experience of participating in consumption at high-level restaurants also positively
influenced intentions to return and recommendations.
Theoretical conclusions
The main conclusion of this thesis is the importance of high-level gastronomy tourism and the potential
it has for the promotion of destinations as a pull factor and generator of tourism flows. The results also
showed the need to update the websites of this type of restaurant to current technology to promote
tourist resources. This study further concludes that gastronomic experience and status positively affect
the intentions of returning and recommending the consumption of high-end gastronomy.
3
Practical application of the dissertation

This thesis contributes significantly through these three models to improving the management and
decision making of restaurant managers at a certain level as well as public managers of destinations at
which high-level gastronomy is or can become a main element of attraction for tourists and thus
generate tourist flows.
The results may also be helpful for institutions and communication managers of destinations in
improving their promotion and communication strategies, creating brand image, identifying target
markets, attracting new tourists, diversifying supply in mature and saturated destinations, and de-
seasonalising demand.
It should be considered that the most difficult task is getting customers to travel to the destination.
Once there, even if their reason for travelling is to visit a single tourist attraction, synergies must be
created between destination entrepreneurs and managers to retain the tourists and extend their stays.
To do so, an increase in the range of activities related to the nucleus (the restaurant) is recommended,
which will encourage loyalty behaviour and the development of joint promotions. We must break with
the idea that the restaurants need the destinations more than the destinations need the restaurants. As
shown in the thesis, this is not the case.
Synergies must be created between the destination and the restaurant managers, as the customers who
visit this type of restaurant associate the destination with the establishment and, given that they have
pleasant memories of the experience that stay with them in the post-travel stage, they form new
motivations that make them potential prescribers to and ambassadors of the destination.
Content of the dissertation

The thesis is a compendium of five articles already published or accepted for publication by various
journals.
Abstract of Chapter 1
The main aim of this chapter is to characterise tourists visiting top-level restaurants to ascertain the
profile of these types of customers, their behaviours and their influence on the destinations where the
restaurants are located The results reveal the existence of two segments whose behaviours differ, where
the individuals of the first segment consider the culinary experience as the main reason for their tourist
visit to the destination. In contrast, those in the second segment consider the main reason for their visit
to the destination to be tourism. Moreover, the diners from both segments display different behaviours
in terms of their post-purchase, recommendation and intention to return behaviours and the perception
of the status with which their visit to the restaurant provides them (Daries, Cristobal Fransi, Ferrer-
Rosell, & Marine-Roig, 2018b).
Tourists travel because they are pushed by internal motivations and attracted or pulled by certain
elements and features of the destinations they select. However, a growing number of destinations have
similar tourist attractions and need to differentiate them. In this chapter, we argue that certain types of
businesses, such as high-quality restaurants, can generate tourism flows in their own right within a
context where the role of tourists and enterprises has shifted from a passive to an active one and where
companies actively seek to become destination pull factors. They also show the importance of the
nucleus (restaurant) as a factor of attraction to the destination, as well as the importance of the
destination/surroundings to the nucleus (Daries, Marine-Roig, Ferrer-Rosell, Cristóbal-Fransi, 2019).
4
Daries (2020) / European Journal of Tourism Research 24, 2413
High-quality restaurants have become key assets in the economies of many countries and are often
considered attractors of tourism in themselves. Moreover, diners who choose high-level restaurants
visit their websites before going, even before going to the destination’s website, and they often book
reservations without knowing where they are located. However, high-quality restaurants do not
promote the tourist resources of an area. The model applied to 980 Michelin-starred restaurants in
France, Italy and Spain shows that website maturity and content development are positively related,
and that the aforementioned restaurants are not taking advantage of the opportunities that the Internet
offers and show differences in progress depending on the country where they are located and the
category (Daries, Cristobal Fransi, & Marine Roig, 2017; Daries, Cristobal-Fransi, Ferrer-Rosell & Marine-
Roig, 2018a).
Posturing or enjoying the gastronomic experience? The aim of this study is to know if the public that
recommends and is regular to this type of establishments if there are really interested in gastronomy,
or really they visit this type of restaurants to be able to explain it to their friends or share it on social
networks. The study confirms that the gastronomic experience and status positively affect the
intentions of returning and recommending the consumption of high-end gastronomy, having the effect
of creating a much stronger experience (Daries, Ferrer-Rosell, Marine-Roig, Cristóbal Fransi, 2018c).
References:
Daries, N., Cristobal-Fransi, E., Ferrer-Rosell, B., & Marine-Roig, E. (2018a). Maturity and development
of high-quality restaurant websites: A comparison of Michelin-starred restaurants in France, Italy
and Spain. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 73, 125-137. 8
Daries Ramón, N., Cristóbal Fransi, E., Ferrer-Rosell, B., & Marine-Roig, E. (2018b). Behaviour of culinary
tourists: A segmentation study of diners at top-level restaurants. Intangible Capital, 14(2), 332-355.
Daries-Ramon, N., Cristobal-Fransi, E., & Marine-Roig, E. (2019). Deployment of restaurants websites’
marketing features: The case of Spanish Michelin-starred restaurants. International Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 20(3), 249-280.
Daries Ramón, N., Ferrer-Rosell, B., Marine-Roig, E., Cristóbal Fransi, E. (2018c). Posturing or enjoying
the gastronomic experience? Effects of reputation and experience in the recommendation of upscale
restaurants. Cuadernos de Turismo,605-608
Daries Ramon, N.; Marine-Roig, E.; Ferrer Rosell, B.; Cristóbal Fransi, E. (2019) Do high-quality
restaurants act as pull factors to a tourist destination? Tourism Analysis (forthcoming)
Hjalager, AM., & Corigliano, M.A. (2000). Food for tourists: determinants of an image. International
Journal of Tourist Research, 2(4): 281–293.
Lai, M. Y., Khoo-Lattimore, C., & Wang, Y. (2019). Food and cuisine image in destination branding:
Toward a conceptual model. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 19(2), 238-251.
Sánchez-Cañizares, S. M., & López-Guzmán, T. (2012). Gastronomy as a tourism resource: profile of the
culinary tourist. Current issues in tourism, 15(3), 229-245.
UNWTO, T. O. (2016). Tourism Highlights, 2016 edition. World. Retrieved from:
http://mkt.unwto.org/publication/unwto-tourism-highlights-2016-edition (Accessed May 14th,
2017)
Coordinating editor: Faizan Ali
5
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH
SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
SUBMISSION
1. The European Journal of Tourism Research (EJTR) accepts for review only manuscripts that
have not been published previously in any language and are not being reviewed for possible
publication in other journals.
2. Submissions must be made in electronic form to Editor-in-chief’s e-mail:
stanislav.ivanov@vumk.eu.
3. Within 5 working days the corresponding author shall receive an e-mail from the Editor-
in-chief, confirming the receipt of the manuscript, advising the name of the coordinating editor
and providing the manuscript’s number to be used in future reference.
4. All correspondence thereafter regarding the review process of the manuscript shall be with
the coordinating editor.
MANUSCRIPT FORMATTING
1. The first page of the manuscript should include: title of the manuscript in capital letters,
the name(s) and affiliation(s) of the author(s), contact details of the corresponding author
(postal address, phone, e-mail, and fax), an abstract of 100-200 words, and not more than 6 key
words. The second page should include the title of the manuscript in capital letters, the
abstract and the key words without name(s) and affiliation(s) of the author(s).
2. The corresponding author shall receive all correspondence and off-prints. He/she is also
responsible for proofs checks.
3. Manuscript formatting requirements: Paper size: A4; Page margins: top/bottom/left/right –
2.5 cm = 1 inch; Text: double spaced; Font: Times New Roman; Font size: 14 points; Alignment:
justified. No footnotes allowed. Use endnotes instead.
4. The text must be written in British English
5. Headings formatting – must be bold, not in capital letters, no indent. Place one return after
the previous paragraph.
6. Tables and Figures should be incorporated in the text. They must be numbered using
Arabic numeral. The title and number of the table has to be above the table, aligned left, and
not in capital letters. The name of the table should be in italic. The title and number of the
figure has to be below the figure, centred, in italic and not in capital letters. The figures must
be provided in a print-ready form in their final size.
7. References. In the text references must be included using the Harvard system – “author,
date” style (e.g. Webster, 2005). Page numbers for specific points or direct quotations must be
given. The reference list must be placed at the end of the manuscript and ordered in
alphabetical order of authors. Specific formats:
 For journal articles - Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the
future. Tourism Management 21(1), 97-116
 For books and monographs - Kotler, Ph., D. H. Haider, I. Rein (1993). Marketing places:
Attracting investment, industry and tourism to cities, states and nations. New York: The Free
Press.
 For chapters in books – Bachvarov, M. (2006). Tourism in Bulgaria. In Hall, D., M. Smith,
B. Marciszewska (ed.) (2006) Tourism in New Europe. The challenges and opportunities of EU
enlargement. Wallingford: CAB International, 241-255
 For conference reports – Cooper, A., A. Wilson (2002). Extending the relevance of TSA
research for the UK: general equilibrium and spillover analysis. Paper presented at the VIth
International Forum on Tourism Statistics, 25th-27th September 2002, Budapest
 For Internet sources - Wirtz, J., S. Kimes, J. Ho, P. Patterson (2002). Revenue management:
resolving potential customer conflicts. Working Paper Series. School of Hotel Administration.
Cornell University. URL:
http://www.hotelschool.cornell.edu/chr/pdf/showpdf/chr/research/working/revenuemanage.p
df (Accessed on 16.12.2005)
TYPES OF PUBLICATIONS
1. Regular articles should normally have between 4000 and 20000 words. EJTR especially
welcomes contributions between 10000 and 20000 words. The paper must include an
introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion and conclusion. The proposed
structure is not compulsory and may vary depending on the specific paper.
2. Research notes should normally have between 1500 and 2000 words.
3. In Tourism Best Practices section of the journal are included papers of between 1000 and
2000 words. These contributions are predominantly practically oriented and are not expected
to further develop theoretical knowledge in field of tourism, but rather show in the form of a
case study how theoretical concepts find their application in the management of tourist
enterprises.
4. Regular article, research notes and case studies in the Tourism Best Practices section are
subject to a double-blind review. They shall be reviewed by at least two anonymous referees.
5. Book reviews should be up to 1500 words and contain the following information: author(s)
or editor(s) for edited books, title, publisher, ISBN, year of publication, number of pages,
original language of publication, resume of the content, how this book contributes to tourism
knowledge.
6. Doctoral dissertations in tourism. EJTR publishes resumes of successfully defended Ph. D.
theses in tourism studies in past 12 months before the date of submission. The submitted
resumes should be not more than 2000 words and are not subject to review. They must include
the following information: author, affiliation of the author, contact details of the author, title of
the dissertation, supervisor, institution awarding the Ph. D. degree, date of defence, goal and
objectives of the dissertation, methodology, results, theoretical conclusions, practical
application of the dissertation, and content of the dissertation (including abstracts of all
chapters). The submitted resume of the dissertation must be accompanied by an official letter
from the supervisor that the resume correctly represents the content of the dissertation.
PROOFS
1. Proofs of accepted papers shall be sent to the corresponding authors for editing. Major
revisions in text are not allowed except in case of editors’ or publisher’s mistakes.
2. The authors will receive the pdf file of the final published version.
COPYRIGHT
The European Journal of Tourism Research is an open access journal. The authors retain
copyrights of their publications. Papers are published under the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
EDITORIAL
Article number
The first chatbot of a tourism/hospitality journal: Editor’s impressions 2401
Stanislav Ivanov
RESEARCH PAPERS
Individual Perceptions of the Value of Leisure: The Influence of the Social 2402
Democratic Welfare State and Leftist Values Systems
Craig Webster, Chih-Lun (Alan) Yen and Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis
Knowledge Sharing in Strategic Alliance Relationships: An Empirical Research on 2403

Hotels in Turkey
Nilüfer Vatansever Toylan, Fatih Semerciöz and Masood-Ul-Hassan
An exploratory and qualitative study on the meaning of transformative tourism 2404

and its facilitators and inhibitors
Jessica Mei Pung and Giacomo Del Chiappa
Investigation of the Motivations and Experiences of Tourists Visiting the Gallipoli 2405
Peninsula as a Dark Tourism Destination
Kadir Çakar
Tourism competitiveness and the well-being of residents: a debate on registered 2406

and non-registered accommodation establishments
José Francisco Perles-Ribes, Ana Belén Ramón-Rodríguez,
Luis Moreno-Izquierdo and María Jesús Such-Devesa
Literary tourism as a field of research over the period 1997-2016 2407

Samet Çevik
Volunteer Tourism: Motivations of Thai Tourists and Western Tourists 2408

Raweewan Proyrungroj
#10yearschallenge: how co-creation permeated tourism research. 2409

Marco Tregua, Anna D’Auria and Harry Costin
Price determinants of Airbnb listing prices in Lake Balaton Touristic Region, 2410
Hungary
Gábor Dudás, Tamás Kovalcsik, György Vida, Lajos Boros and Gyula Nagy
An extended model of destination image formation: The inclusion of sensory 2411

images
Bình Nghiêm-Phú and Awangku Hassanal Bahar Pengiran Bagul
RESEARCH NOTES
The joy of riding or walk of shame? The theme park experience of obese people 2412
Yaniv Poria, Jeremy Beal and Arie Reichel
DOCTORAL DISSERTATION SUMMARIES
Relational dynamics of high-level gastronomy in tourism 2413

Natalia Daries Ramón

EJTR 24 - Full Text

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

EJTR 24 - Full Text

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

4

ISSN (PRINT): 1994 - 7658

The first chatbot of a tourism/hospitality journal: Editor’s impressions 2401

Knowledge Sharing in Strategic Alliance Relationships: An Empirical Research on 2403

An exploratory and qualitative study on the meaning of transformative tourism 2404

Tourism competitiveness and the well-being of residents: a debate on registered 2406

Literary tourism as a field of research over the period 1997-2016 2407

Volunteer Tourism: Motivations of Thai Tourists and Western Tourists 2408

#10yearschallenge: how co-creation permeated tourism research. 2409

An extended model of destination image formation: The inclusion of sensory 2411

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION SUMMARIES

Relational dynamics of high-level gastronomy in tourism 2413

Keywords: chatbot, social media, communications with authors, academic journal

© 2020 The Authors

Figure 1. Chatbot blocks

Figure 2. Content of sample blocks

Figure 3. Sample AI rules

Conclusions, insights and recommendations

 Direct the user to the journal’s website to stimulate readership.

Keywords: social democracy, liberalism, leisure, public opinion, Marxism

© 2020 The Author(s)

Table 1: Total annual hours per worker (2017)

Methods and Analysis

Table 2. Dependent variable—importance of leisure

Table 3. Independent variables

Table 4. Pearson bivariate correlations with political variables

Table 5. OLS regression with country-level variables

Descriptive Statistics Mean Std. Deviation

Table 6. OLS regression with individual-level variables

1 Department of Tourism Management, Kırklareli University, Turkey, E-mail: nilufer.vatansever@klu.edu.tr

Keywords: Inter-Organizational Knowledge Sharing, Alliances, Hospitality, Innovativeness

© 2020 The Author(s)

Specifically, in hospitality functioning, since, knowledge is concerned to a firm’s offerings, customers,

Knowledge Sharing Hospitality Alliances

Therefore, in destination literature, alliances and collaborations in terms of interdependence,

Knowledge-based View of Knowledge Sharing Hospitality Alliances

 Tacit-to-tacit-socialization-sharing experiences to create shared mental models-In hotel a

Relational & Social Capital as Innovative Knowledge Sharing Enablers

Shared Vision H2c Inter-Organizational H1 Organizational

Figure 1. Research Model

Table 1. Constructs and Scale References

Validity and Reliability of Instruments

Similarly, the results of the factor analysis of 11 statement-inter-organizational knowledge sharing

Table 2. Validity and Reliability Analysis

Our alliance partner enables us to understand the

Knowledge Sharing 0.927

Internal Innovation 0.736

Table 3. Sample Profiles of Hotels and Alliance Relations

Duration of contract with alliance partner

Descriptive and Correlation Analysis

Table 4. Means, standard deviations and cross-correlations

inter-organizational knowledge sharing enablers: shared visionIKSPIBO (β=0.499, p<0.001,

Table 5. Testing of Hypotheses

Discussion and Conclusions

Besides, by establishing inter-firm knowledge sharing as a basis of collaborative innovation in

knowledge sharing hospitality strategic alliances can be a vital foundation of innovativeness.

Limitations and further research

García-Villaverde, P. M., Elche, D., Martínez-Pérez, Á. & Ruiz-Hortega, M. J. (2017). Determinants of

Keywords: transformative tourism, transformation, tourist experience, wellbeing, facilitators, inhibitors

© 2020 The Author(s)

In tourism experiences, transformative learning is believed to occur in the shape of confronting

Transformation facilitators and inhibitors

Results and Discussion

Table 1. Summary of interviewees’ characteristics