Akrasia and tourism: why we sometimes act against our better judgement?

Abstract

There are many practical problems that we must come to grips with in our daily lives. Often, we are presented with options or alternatives in reference to these problems. How we weigh and choose which course of action to pursue is of obvious significance. We may choose rationally, i.e. we may choose the option that is judged to be in our best interest, or we may choose irrationally, i.e. against our better judgement. In the latter case, we would be succumbing to akrasia ‒ demonstrating weakness of will, where the search for pleasure overwhelms good judgement. This paper applies the concept of akrasia to two tourism case studies: one, on the choice to purchase endangered animal souvenirs in Cuba, and the other on sex tourism in Costa Rica. I conclude by suggesting that codes of ethics, accreditation schemes, guidebooks and interpretive programmes have a role to play in educating tourism actors on the importance of choosing alternatives that support broader initiatives over those of a strictly personal (i.e. self-interest) nature.

Keywords:

• akrasia
• weakness of will
• sex tourism
• endangered animal souvenirs

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Note on contributor

David Fennell researches mainly in the areas of ecotourism, tourism ethics, and moral issues tied to the use of animals in the tourism industry. He has written several books, including Ecotourism (4th edition forthcoming), Ecotourism Programme Planning, Tourism Ethics, Codes of Ethics in Tourism, and more recently a book entitled, Tourism and Animal Ethics and is the founding Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Ecotourism.