Interview with Valeria Minghetti
Valeria Minghetti is Head of Research-CISET, International Center of Studies on Tourism Economics, Italy
Valeria Minghetti is Head of Research at CISET. She graduated in Economics with a specialization in Tourism Economics, and has more than 15 years’ experience in national and international projects. She specialises in tourism demand and market trends analysis, economic impact of tourism at different territorial scales, application of IT innovation in the travel and tourism industry, tourism and transports. Valeria is on X at @valeming
She is interviewed here by Saverio Bertolucci, as part of our ongoing Tourism Interviews Project.
Many thanks to Valeria for an insightful interview that should prove valuable to students, academics and professionals alike.
Various authors have set out different ‘platforms’ and perspectives over the last 50 years. Jafar Jafari set out advocacy, cautionary, adaptancy, knowledge-based, and public platforms (Jafari, 1990, 2001, 2007). Do you think the perspectives and writing from the experts generally, accurately reflected the ‘state of the debates’, and the reality, of tourism as it developed? With the benefit of hindsight, do you think ‘tourism studies’ got it right?
Tourism is no different from other sectors of analysis, but perhaps here it is easier to express opinions without there being adequate verification upstream. In other words, some statements concerning the evolution of tourism in general or of specific aspects seem not to be supported by research that actually demonstrates these results or to be confirmed by other analyses. In this way, they and end up being an opportunity to express a personal belief or position.
Clearly, it is everyone's right to express their opinions, but we must avoid that incorrect storytelling influences future research and also those who use this information to make decisions, such as businesses and destinations. This is because tourism is an applied science.
Looking at the present, an example of a ‘hot’ current discussion is the one on the existence of ‘overtourism’ and its definition. This also relates to the measurement of the destination’s carrying capacity and the effectiveness of defining a maximum number of people who can access the destination in a given time period.
However, it should also be considered that it is also from discussion that new theories and solutions are generated, so tourism studies will continue to be important, especially in a multidisciplinary perspective.
Is there a book – any book, fiction or non-fiction - that profoundly shaped your thinking about tourism as a human activity? Tell us just a little about it, and why?
All the books I can think of right now refer to texts I read for work. One that fascinated me a lot was Tourism, technologies and competitive strategies, which came out in 1993 edited by Auliana Poon. The book analyses the major challenges facing the world tourism industry, when it was entering a more mature phase, and the strong evolution of mass tourism, which started to move away from a logic of standardized package tours and to develop rapidly. In the 90s, tourism became a complex and multi-faceted industry and faced growing pressures, since consumers demanded for more individually tailored holidays and that generated an increasingly competitive operational environment. But in this period, huge opportunities were provided by the disrupting role played by information technologies and how these technologies and innovation in general were creating a new "best practice" of flexibility, market segmentation and diagonal integration within tourism. The book was one of the first works to analyse the relationship between information technology and tourism, really original and inspiring both for academics and practitioners.
In recent decades we have had various ‘turns’ and ‘platforms’ relating to localism, ethical behaviour, social justice, decolonisation and degrowth, amongst others. Do any of these strike you as either particularly insightful or particularly limited in their approach?
The “taking turns” phenomenon is connected to what discussed in the first question, i.e. to the progress of research, but also to the proliferation of diverging opinions, often not supported by appropriate evidence. The main goal of critical thinking is to assess these statements and discuss them in order to prevent or mitigate potential negative effects and distorted perceptions. For example, when talking about the evolution of market segments and the emergence of new tourism requirements, this must be proven by a cross-evaluation of the indications coming from different sources, primary and secondary, not only by the "experience" of the expert and his/her personal feeling. Otherwise, as said before, that incorrect storytelling influences future research and also those who use this information to make decisions, such as businesses and destinations.
This also incurs when there is no real knowledge of the limits of the research carried out (e.g. for the methodology applied, the sample used in case of a survey), which means that the results obtained cannot be considered valid on a general level nor be extended, for example, to other territorial contexts, except with specific precautions.
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 ?
The term Overtourism originated in 2016 from an article published by Skift. But recently, the director of Skift himself, Rafat Ali, said it was time to drop it. The popularity of the term has grown in tandem with an often simplistic use of it. A first aspect to consider concerns the concept itself: "excessive" tourism measured against what parameter(s)? Economic, social, environmental, psychological… etc. Secondly, the identification of the presence/absence of overtourism and its characteristics are closely related to space and time dimensions. Generally, no destination suffers from total overtourism. High concentrations of tourists are found on particular days/periods of the year and, for the same days, in particular areas of the destination. This situation nullifies the effectiveness of “The Number”, which refers to the establishment of a fixed maximum visitor threshold. Instead, it requires the formulation of a dynamic approach to place accessibility, similar to the revenue management systems used by tourism businesses. If in the last case, the goal is to maximize profits, in the case of destinations is to maximize the well-being of all "users" (tourists, resident community, other visitors) while ensuring the economic, social and environmental sustainability of the local context.
Clearly, in the initial phase stressful situations can be sudden and obviously unpredictable. However, their evolution depends greatly on the ability of local administrations to understand the dynamics of demand and then to create the conditions for adequate management of tourist flows and of facilities offered, meeting the requirements of all destination users.
In the nineteenth century Thomas Cook and others of his era championed the growth of leisure travel, and connected it to a sort of humanism – tourism’s growth represented the fruits of modernity that should be made more widely available to all. Today travel tends to be discussed more in the context of a culture of limits – as if we have reached the upper limit of what our planet and its inhabitants will take, environmentally and culturally. Where do you stand on the question of societal limits and future possibilities ?
The growth of tourism and its "democratization" are directly related to the global increase in economic and social well-being, which has led more people to travel or to increase the number of trips taken in a period of time. In my opinion, the spread of digitization has helped to broaden horizons, reduce the psychological distance of places, and potentially foster greater knowledge of them on the part of tourists, who now often organize their own holidays, unlike in the days of Thomas Cook.
Paradoxically, however, the information overload and the multiple filters of interpretation that the web offers them (through social media, influencers, etc.) also seem to have sharpened people's perception that they can do anything and have the right to do it, and this is not only in tourism.
There is often little or distorted knowledge and awareness of places and a lack of critical thinking behind one's actions. In practice, digitization, instead of creating a general benefit, ends up generating a negative effect on people's behavior.
The awareness, on the part of potential visitors, of possible stressful situations (which would also be detrimental to their enjoyment) could generate different choices. Choices that, because of their nature, would not be definable as “limits” per se, in social terms. Not least because setting a limit is equivalent to the argument made earlier about defining a maximum access threshold, which can be easily identified for closed places (e.g., a museum), or bounded, such as an island or a park, but hardly for an open place, such as a city.
Global international tourism has increased massively, from around 55 million in the mid 1950s, up to 1.5 billion today. One could see this as inspiring, or perhaps frightening and unsustainable. How do you see it?
The growth of the phenomenon has always been a positive factor, especially for those areas (also in Europe) where tourism becomes the main driver of economic development, as opposed to other sectors (such as agriculture and industry) that are marginal or otherwise in crisis. Clearly, what must be aimed at, learning also from the mistakes of past development models, is to ensure an equitable distribution of the wealth derived from it at the local level.
From this point of view, a new term has been coined in 2020, "regenerative tourism," which aims to move beyond the concepts of sustainability and responsibility to tourism that generates real local value and well-being for all the stakeholders involved. Future for Tourism, a coalition of 6 international NGOs, has compiled a list of 13 core principles that characterize this type of tourism. Among them, the importance of maintaining a general overview of destinations and their characteristics, which means including tourism in an overall destination development plan; aiming for quality over quantity of tourists attracted; redefining metrics for evaluating economic success; encouraging circular use of resources; limiting land consumption for tourism purposes; diversifying tourism demand, encouraging proximity tourism; protect destination inner identity.
Considering the social dimension of tourism, in addition to the local community, this must also be read from the side of the tourist and the community of tourism workers, who can be temporary or permanent residents of the destination. As for tourists, it is important to adopt a “tourism for all” approach, so that destinations and businesses are able to welcome any type of customer, from those who have no problems to those who have temporary or permanent, visible or hidden difficulties. So not only people with various disabilities, but elderly people, pregnant women, families with small children and prams, etc.
As far as workers are concerned, a tourism sector that welcomes them, creating the best working conditions and professional prospects, is an issue that has gained importance after the pandemic. The Covid crisis has led to a social change in terms of perceptions and expectations related to work and severe staff shortages. Here the critical aspects are those of work/life balance, the improvement of corporate welfare and how to communicate work in tourism better and more effectively. This is to break away from many stereotypes and make new professions known to young people too, as well as giving value back to traditional ones. CISET is currently working on these topics with the Government of the Veneto Region in Italy.
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 ?
The pandemic crisis has brought about some social and economic changes but, to a large extent, it has accelerated phenomena that were already underway, but perhaps not yet fully emerged, such as the issue of work in tourism discussed just above.
Apart from that, Covid has also changed the general organization of work and, in particular, it has stimulated the explosion of new organizational formulas (remote/smart working, total or partial), which in some cases have remained even after the pandemic. In addition, the exponential increase in the use of collaboration platforms and related services, which has impacted business tourism heavily, and the growth of interest in work-ation (work+vacation). But it is also true that business travel was already slowing down pre-Covid, in terms of frequency and length of travel. Conferences and trade fairs were especially down, while business and incentive trips were held. The beginning of "virtualization" of contacts and meeting proposals were already started and bleisure was on the rise.
As for other economic aspects, the pandemic has deepened an already existing spending gap between upper-class and lower-middle class consumers/tourists, as well as boosted the spread of digitalization and of e-commerce. And even the interest in environmental issues was born before 2020 (see Greta Thunberg), with the emergence of the first signs of actual willingness to spend on sustainable services – with the luxury segment increasingly attentive to the topic- and of “radical” niches that don't take planes, cars, etc.
Focusing on tourists’ behaviour, there has been an increase in interest in active holidays, in non-hotel accommodation and open-air lodging solutions and in alternative experiences. But we must also consider the “short memory” effect. What we have seen in the last two years, especially for some segments of demand, is a tendency towards cancellation of what happened in 2020 and 2021, with a rapid return to old habits. And this has also been seen in the functioning of the tourism industry, businesses and destinations. In practice, it is as if the tourism system had restarted exactly where it stopped, in March 2020.
More than a couple of decades ago Jafari, and others, suggested that ‘tourism’ scholars should look to engage with and publish in the journals of other disciplines and fields. It is often commented upon that academic fields and disciplines can end up like silos, insulated from developments in related fields. How do you see the state of tourism related scholarship? Where should we look for inspiration?
From the practitioner/professional perspective, tourism, by its nature, is a transversal sector, that is, made up of different businesses, from a product and technological point of view, which sell goods and services designed for tourists or that also meet the needs of tourists. In this way, the adoption of a holistic approach would be even more appropriate. This means enhancing the nature of tourism and its integration with: agri-food chain; craftsmanship; heritage, cultural and creative productions, new technologies. But also environment, mobility, construction and social development. In this context, it is important to stress that interventions in other sectors have an impact on tourism and vice versa, and this implies the need to have ad hoc rules and regulations.
From the academic perspective, multidisciplinarity is always beneficial, if it means combining different knowledge to make a more in-depth analysis of the phenomenon, also finding different interpretative keys. However, it is also true that there are often papers presented in tourism journals written by authors with non-tourism expertise, who use tourism as a mere field of experimentation to have one more opportunity to publish, without having real knowledge of the phenomenon. This can lead to banal or wrong conclusions, precisely because they do not have the elements to correctly interpret what their model analyses. It would be worth being more cautious about this. I also think it is interesting that tourism experts publish in other sector journals, to the extent that they are able to highlight the interrelationships with tourism and the effects that actions in one area influence the other and vice versa.
Finally, from your own personal experiences, is there a memory or vignette you can share that might interest or inspire young people interested in the tourism and hospitality industries?
Following my personal experience and thinking about the path that led me to work in the field of tourism, there are some important aspects that might guide your study and career path. First of all, listen to your intuitions. Even if analytical thinking has been promoted as opposed to “gut feelings”, especially in the Western part of the world, intuitions represents a different way to elaborate information. Sometimes, our brain knows what is good for us before we are aware of it. This applies to your study and work choices, but also to the resolution of a problem, during a research or in the company where you will work.
Secondly, be curious. Never stop asking yourself questions. Curiosity and the desire to find solutions is what makes a difference in your job, also in tourism. And women are particularly inclined in this, because they are generally more precise and methodical than men ;-).
Finally, if you are interested in working in tourism research and consultancy, remember that tourism by its nature is an applied science. It may seem obvious but it means making the results of pure research usable for public institutions and private operators, for destinations and businesses, as well as for tourists and local communities. Use scientific methods to find approaches and answers that are useful for growing and making the tourism system more sustainable and competitive: do not used tourism just to test your theories.