In the latest of our TH:TM interviews - this one arranged by Saverio Bertolucci - Dimitrios Buhalis reflects on how we think about global tourism.
Professor Dimitrios Buhalis is one of the most well known and well respected experts on global tourism. A long standing professor at Bournemouth University in the UK, he is a Strategic Management and Marketing expert with specialisation in Information Communication Technology applications in the Tourism, Travel, Hospitality and Leisure industries. He has has written and co-edited more than 25 books and 300 scientific articles.
We are delighted to present his thoughts below. We hope it prompts readers’ own reflections - feel free to comment below the article.
There is a short accompanying article on The “Good Tourism” Blog, here.
The interview, along with the others in the series, will be published in the Journal of Tourism Futures.
Saverio:
Various authors have set out many different perspectives on mass tourism over the last 50 years. What are the biggest changes between the tourism’s past and present ?
Dimitrios Buhalis:
I think the most important topic is the democratization of tourism and travel. Increasing numbers of people exercise their fundamental right to travel, and more people have the opportunity to travel who did not have this opportunity before. This was happening particularly before Covid-19, and will continue in its aftermath.
We can say there is an abundance of capacity. With the advent of the internet, increasingly people could easily find a lot of information about places as well as opportunities to travel to them. Tourism also bounced back after the crisis of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre of September 11th 2001, with the new no-frills airlines becoming increasingly important at that time. Then Airbnb and the sharing economy came along, again making traveling more affordable. So there is a combination of: (a) ample transportation opportunities through the development of no frills airlines, accessible land and sea transportation; (b) ample accommodation especially since the sharing economy reduced costs whilst; (c) technological platforms and aggressive marketing made travelling easier and cheaper (Buhalis, Andreu, Gnoth, 2020).
So tourism transformed itself into an essential part of people’s lives and an inelastic item of consumer expenditure. Why? Because people traveling is not a luxury anymore but rather a core aspect of living. People travel to work, transact, play, love, meet friends and for all sorts of reasons. Developments in the industry and in the economy have made that much easier. That is the democratisation of travel in a nutshell, and it’s a very good thing. Tourism has become less of an elitist activity, which is a wonderful for inclusion, accessibility and opening horizons. But that has created pressures on many host communities, challenging their way of life and impacting everyday functions.
Saverio:
Is there a book – any book, fiction or non-fiction - that profoundly shaped your thinking about tourism as a human activity?
Dimitrios Buhalis:
The longstanding volume Tourism: Principles and Practice (Cooper et al, various eds.) stands out. I was responsible for two of the chapters in the very first edition (1993) which I co-authored with Chris Cooper. This set down a mode of analysis of the tourism industry that others have built on, but it remains an important standard.
However, my first favourite book was The Holiday Makers by Jost Krippendorf (1987). This was an important and ground breaking book in understanding the nature of contemporary mass tourism. Bear in mind it was published 5 years before the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (‘the Rio Conference’), the event that mainstreamed sustainability. It alerted us to many of the discussions we still have today.
Saverio
The term ‘overtourism’ became de rigueur during 2017. Google Trends suggests that its rise to prominence followed much publicised, but small, protests in Barcelona, mirrored by other expressions of discontent in Venice, Amsterdam and elsewhere. It soon became a point of reference in the media, in academia and in global tourism organisations such as the WTTC. What do you make of this ? What does this newish term mean to you?
Dimitrios Buhalis:
I keep repeating that there is no such a thing as overtourism ! The phenomenon of tourist honeypots, characterized by a significant concentration of travelers, poses challenges for both tourists and host communities. This issue stems largely from inadequate planning, management, and marketing strategies, primarily on the part of destination tourism authorities. Insufficient attention to these aspects exacerbates the discomfort experienced by visitors and locals alike, leading to overcrowded conditions and strained resources. In essence, the failure to effectively address the influx of tourists in popular destinations underscores the importance of comprehensive planning, sustainable management practices, and innovative marketing initiatives to ensure a more harmonious and enjoyable experience for all involved parties.
Rafat Ali of the tourism industry intelligence groups Skift effectively invented the term ‘overtourism’ in 2016 in his article Exploring the Coming Perils of Overtourism. He subsequently explained its development in another piece, The Genesis of Overtourism: Why We Came Up With the Term and What’s Happened Since. Then in 2023 he concurred with the paper written by Michael O’Regan, Noel Salazar, Jayeon Choe and myself (2022) that looks at overtourism as a ‘discursive formation’ rather than an uncontestable truth. He eventually wrote ‘That It Is Time to Ditch the Phrase ‘Overtourism’’. That seems to be a pretty good account of the birth, life and prospective retirement of the term.
It’s important for tourism researchers and professionals to understand that there is no overtourism. In reality, it relates to your first question. More people would like to travel and we all feel that we have the right to see different places and engage with different cultures. This inevitably entails a higher volume of tourism. So there are more people going to places and engaging in different kinds of activities. This happening has created some problems for people receiving these tourists. There is some evident resentment and “not in my backyard” sentiment. Having said that, this can be justified. We all expect that we are going to be able to travel everywhere else, but we don’t expect other people to come to our communities and change the way we live our lives unduly. There can be selfish behaviour.
However, as tourism professionals and researchers we are responsible for developing tourism, attracting tourists and influencing their patterns of behaviour. Has tourism created problems? Yes, it has created problems. The sharing economy in particular has created problems because it invited tourists into residential areas, rather than concentrating their activity in well defined tourist zones. This has pushed inhabitants away by increasing the cost of living, making it difficult to live in some areas. This has also led to a sense of loss arising from the changes to the life that they used to lead before. I was recently speaking with a lady from Kyoto, in Japan, who confirmed this point. In Italy, accounts from residents of Florence and Venice bear this out.
Equally, though, we should appreciate the fact that, because of these developments, many have become much richer, as the value of their property has gone up significantly. Because of the sharing economy some people have the funds to renovate their houses and improve the quality of their lives. Places that were abandoned, dark, run down, perhaps very old, became all of a sudden renovated and attractive. I accept that people have suffered inconveniences, but there is also a good deal of nostalgia. Some people wish to turn the clock back 30 years, but life has progressed! We set out a balanced view on this in our paper on the sharing economy (Buhalis, Andreu and Gnoth 2020).
Many neighbourhoods have indeed experience improvements as a result of tourism and gentrification. Tourism injected capital into local economies, which catalysed development and improved infrastructure within neighbourhoods. Businesses catering to tourists, such as restaurants, hotels, and entertainment venues, often sprout up, creating job opportunities and stimulating economic growth. This influx of investment has led to the revitalization of neglected areas, as entrepreneurs and developers often see potential in previously overlooked neighbourhoods due to their proximity to tourist attractions.
Gentrification, while often contentious, can also bring positive changes to neighbourhoods. As property values rise and affluent residents move in, there is typically an increase in demand for services and amenities, such as improved public transportation, parks and schools. This can benefit long-term residents by enhancing their quality of life, providing access to resources that were previously lacking, rehabilitating deteriorating housing stock and beautifying public spaces, thus improving the overall aesthetic appeal of the neighbourhood.
However, this needs to be planned and managed by local authorities, as rising property values can lead to displacement and housing affordability challenges for existing residents. Small traditional businesses may struggle to compete with newcomers, threatening the authenticity of neighbourhoods. We have a range of legislative, management and marketing tools that can support thoughtful planning and development strategies, ultimately leading to vibrant and inclusive communities.
Some believe in an idealistic kind of situation. Often they do not want tourists, but do want wealth, infrastructure, transportation and public services. If a region or locality lacks tourism as a source of wealth generation, it must seek alternative avenues to stimulate economic growth. However, these alternatives may carry their own set of drawbacks and consequences. For instance, relying solely on industries such as manufacturing or resource extraction can lead to environmental degradation, exploitation of natural resources and dependence on volatile global markets. So we should compare what tourism is doing versus, say, car manufacturing, or the impact that any other industry would have brought. The “Overtourism debate” should focus on smart planning, management and marketing towards optimizing the impacts of tourism.
We should not be frightened of the growth in international travel. It is all a matter of how you do it. Take a simple example, the Acropolis in Greece, which had a very inexpensive entry fee all year around, regardless of the visitor numbers, until recently. Now, in response to crowding, the government has introduced differentiated pricing. It is a matter of management and how you operate tourism honeypots. So there are specific problems in specific places, and we should endeavour to address these through policy rather than declaring tourism to constitute ‘overtourism’. There is a lot of research on tourism planning, management and marketing. Politicians and tourism boards should learn from this international experience, and implement evidence based, comprehensive methods to optimise tourism impacts.
Saverio:
Covid-19 hit the two things tourism and hospitality rely upon hard: travel and conviviality. A variety of ‘lessons’ have been mooted, from the need to travel less and value the local, to a need to get back to growth. What, if any, are the ‘tourism’ lessons that societies should learn from the experience of Covid-19 ?
Dimitrios Buhalis:
Two or three things come to mind. Tourism is inelastic, a necessity for many, and missing out on leisure travel contributed to social problems and even mental health issues. Missing out on business travel and MICE (meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions) also had detrimental effects on business opportunities and career progression for many. It is really very important to understand how critical it is for individuals to travel and to engage with other societies. It facilitates important aspects of social life for individuals, friends and families. It also prevents mental health problems. I feel we’ve taken tourism for granted and become rather blasé about the benefits of leisure travel.
The second thing is that many intellectuals and academics advocated and predicted a future ‘of ‘sustainable tourism’ involving a reduction in the number of tourists. They associated sustainability with niche markets involving small numbers of tourists, and predicted that the volume of tourism will be reduced. Evidence shows that they were wrong in their forecasts. The lesson we should learn is that savvy consumers are looking to travel no matter what.
People travel because it is absolutely critical for them to travel. We need to manage the industry in much better ways; we need to be much smarter in the ways we operate; and we need to create policies to address the needs of different people. Where there are tensions between local people and tourists – and this can happen – of course we need to address that transparently, including by keeping value co-creation in mind. This is why I emphasise the need to plan, manage and market tourism smartly and sustainably in order to optimized impacts.
Third, recent research we published (Bethune, Buhalis and Miles; 2022) explains that destination resilience needs strengthening to empower tourism managers and policy makers in the development of more adaptive strategies in the face of vulnerabilities, growing risks and the uncertainty of crises and disasters. Risks at the local, national and international levels are becoming ever more systemic, unpredictable, with high (and rising) costs for recovery. Tourism managers and stakeholders at both the local and national level must be empowered through greater information sharing and responsiveness during the crisis/disaster. Real Time Response (RTR) should involve a smart systems approach to advancing destination resilience.
Saverio:
Can you offer us a few comments on the state of academic publishing in tourism. Where should scholars interested in the role of tourism in society be focused?
Dimitrios Buhalis:
We should be looking at the big challenges of society. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) can help in identifying these, and we published an editorial recently to address that (Buhalis et al, 2023).
It is also important to recognize that different regions have different needs. If you go to economically poorer countries in Africa, or certain places in Asia, the necessities of life are pressing. In more wealthy societies the issue is more one of quality of life. Tourism is not standing on its own, and we should consider what alternatives are available.
COVID-19 demonstrated that tourism is a critical economic activity everywhere and that it influences art, heritage and all aspects of social life. Tourism exists within an ecosystem of different industries and stakeholders, so the challenges are place specific. If you are in Norway you have got a national economy based on energy production, so tourism features, but is less important. This is not the case in Malta, Cyprus or Sardinia, where tourism is much more central to economic activity. We really need to be realistic and learn from evidence based research and experience. There is a lot of expenditure and a lot of research being done. But we need to undertake research that is meaningful, and not for the sake of merely doing a study with the primary aim to publish yet another paper. Research should lead to addressing major societal challenges, and tourism can be a key instrument to address those.
References
Bethune, E., Buhalis, D., Miles, L. 2022, Real Time Response: conceptualizing a smart systems approach to destination resilience, Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, Volume 23, March
Buhalis, D., Leung, X.Y., Fan, D., Darcy, S., Chen, G., Xu, F., Wei-Han Tan, G., Nunkoo, R. and Farmaki, A. (2023), Tourism 2030 and the contribution to the sustainable development goals: The Tourism Review viewpoint, Editorial, Tourism Review, Vol. 78 No. 2, pp. 293-313
Buhalis D., Andreu L., Gnoth J. 2020, The dark side of the sharing economy: Balancing value co‐creation and value co‐destruction. Psychology and Marketing. 2020;1–16.
Cooper, C., Fletcher, J., Gilbert, D. and Wanhill, S. Tourism: Principles and Practice. . Trans-Atlantic Publications, 311 Bainbridge Street, Philadelphia, PA 19147. 1993. 290p. $47.50. (1994). Journal of Travel Research, 32(3), 72-73.
Krippendorf, K. (1987), The Holiday Makers: Understanding the Impact of Leisure and Travel. Heinneman, London
O’ Regan, M., Salazar, N., Choe, J. and Buhalis, D. (2022), "Unpacking overtourism as a discursive formation through interdiscursivity", Tourism Review, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 54-71