Critical tourism scholars: brokers of hope

Abstract

The past four decades of tourism research have demonstrated that the field would be impoverished without recognising the human aspect of scientific inquiry. The contributions made through critical approaches, Indigenous perspectives, qualitative methods and morally instilled concepts such as ‘sustainability’ or ‘community development’ have accentuated that tourism scholars are not detached and value-free producers of knowledge. Rather, our gender, ethnicity, personal and political views enter research agendas and actively shape knowledge. Alarmed by a host of social, economic, environmental, political and ethical concerns, and motivated to end injustice, inequality, oppression and discrimination, we also circumnavigate hope. However, researchers’ relationships with hope can be problematic, as evidenced by the recent tensions within critical tourism scholarship. In order to examine the extent to which hope ought to be part of tourism research, it is important to engage with the notion of hope seriously and methodically. By drawing on different varieties of hope, it is argued that these can underpin research projects to different degrees, including critical hope, hope-as-utopia, transformative hope, radical hope and pragmatic hope. It is emphasised that hope is connected to critical research in elementary ways and plays a vital role in envisioning a more just, inclusive, sustainable and equitable world. The acknowledgment of hope as part of critical research is particularly valuable amid the COVID-19 pandemic – an event with devastating consequences for communities worldwide. Through a hopeful lens, our momentary loss of tourism may bring with it a renewed appreciation and care, which has been eroded by rampant commodification and comatose consumerism. The hope driving post COVID-19 visions of tourism is argued to lie in more thoughtful and responsible engagement with tourism, and in our ability to positively transform it.

摘要

过去40年的旅游研究表明, 若忽视科学探究中的人文因素, 那么旅游研究将会陷入一种贫瘠状态。通过批判性方法、本土观点、质性方法和道德灌输的概念（如”可持续性”或”社区发展”）所作的贡献, 凸显出旅游学者不是超然的、价值中立的知识生产者。相反, 旅游学者将自己的性别、种族、个人的政治观点带入研究议程中, 并能动地塑造了知识体系。我们对一系列社会、经济、环境、政治和道德问题保持警惕, 致力于去解决不公正、不平等、压迫和歧视的社会问题, 同时也怀抱希望。然而, 研究者与”希望”的关系可能是有问题的, 这一点可以从近期批判性旅游学术研究中的张力得到证明。希望应该成为旅游研究的一部分, 且有必要对其概念进行严肃、系统地探讨以检验其程度大小如何。本文通过借鉴不同类别的希望, 认为这些希望可以在不同程度上支撑研究项目, 其中包括批判式希望、乌托邦式希望、变革式希望、激进式希望和实用式希望。需要强调的是, 希望与批判性基础研究有关, 在构想一个更加公平公正、包容、可持续的世界过程中发挥着至关重要的作用。在对全人类社会产生毁灭性影响的新型冠状病毒肺炎 (COVID-19) 蔓延期间, 希望在批判性研究中显得尤为重要。透过希望的镜头, 因商品化和麻木的消费主义造成旅游业的暂时损失可能会给我们带来新的理解和关注。后新冠 (post COVID-19) 时代旅游业发展的希望在于参与旅游业的严谨和责任以及积极变革旅游业的能力。

Keywords:

• Critical tourism studies
• hope
• hopeful tourism
• pragmatic hope
• critical hope
• radical hope
• transformative hope
• fragility
• COVID-19
• pandemic

关键词:

• 批判性研究
• 希望
• 希望的旅游
• 实用式希望
• 批判式希望
• 激进式希望
• 变革式希望
• 脆弱性
• 新型冠状病毒
• 流行病

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Tomas Pernecky

Tomas Pernecky is Associate Professor in the School of Hospitality and Tourism, Faculty of Culture and Society at the Auckland University of Technology (AUT), New Zealand. He is passionate about investigating the ways in which social realities are constructed, and the implication and possibilities this denotes for different peoples and communities. His research interests are broad and multifaceted, ranging from the philosophy of science to specific areas of phenomenology, social constructionism, social ontology, post-existentialism, sustainable leadership and a host of conceptual, theoretical and methodological issues examined in the context of events, tourism, hospitality and leisure.