Ambivalence in the evolution of a community-based tourism sharing concept: a public governance approach

ABSTRACT

Limited attention has been given to the underlying prerequisites for how the tourism industry can develop a well-informed, holistic and strategic governance that would lead to more robust sustainable tourism governance. By introducing a theoretical approach stressing a deeper and more contextual understanding of tourism development in the face of a growing interest in the sharing economy, the study engenders insights into the complexity of one public tourism organisation's creativity and ambivalence when approaching alternative tourism strategies. The aim is to undertake an in-depth investigation into the evolution of one tourism sharing economy concept initiated and implemented by a public tourism organisation in Sweden, focusing especially on the factors driving and hampering change from traditional tourism growth to a sharing business logic. Concluding remarks revolve around the complex environment in which the public tourism organisation manoeuvres. On the one hand, the study considers the lock-in of the vertical tourism-centric discourse and, on the other hand, the potential of breaking free from the traditional business model through co-creational capacity building in the regional context.

KEYWORDS:

• Public governance
• sharing economy
• evolutionary economic geography
• sustainable development

Introduction

There is a growing interest among public tourism organisations to capitalise on the platform economy, specifically concepts focusing on locals sharing their own authentic personal local spaces. It is often assumed this would lead to more inclusive and resource-efficient tourism (Heo, 2016; Hodkinson et al., 2017; Richardson, 2015; Richards & Russo, 2016). Nevertheless, the evidence of positive impacts of the tourism sharing economy on sustainable development is weak (Gössling & Michael Hall, 2019). Existing research states that the basic driving force behind the evolution of the tourism sharing economy is dual: it offers new business opportunities in the face of new and advanced information and communication technologies and an opportunity to drive transition towards sustainability (Gössling & Michael Hall, 2019; Hodkinson et al., 2017). In the tourism context, the growing popularity of the sharing economy is often explained as a response to visitors’ desire to connect with the local community, implying that this desire brings sustainability into the consumption and production of the tourist experience (Heo, 2016). However, the tourism sharing economy is complex and contextual, surrounded by myth-making that reproduces the notion of its power to unlock sustainability in society through tourism (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2017). A growing number of studies have provided evidence of conflicts of interest between the lure for “the local” and local inhabitants’ experience of exploitation and marginalisation in their own neighbourhood due to for example local tours and Airbnb (Russo & Richards, 2016). Research showcases that the motives behind engaging in the sharing economy diverge, sometimes overlapping or even blurring. Unclear motives increase the risk that the sharing logic will become a mask for commercial business as usual, so-called “sharewashing”, and further, the risk of losing legitimacy as a trustworthy organisation (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015; Hawlitschek et al., 2018).

In this context public governance is one of the most significant factors, which influence how tourism develops and becomes a facilitator of sustainable development (Dinica, 2009; Dredge & Jamal, 2015; Gill & Williams, 2017; Hall, 2011). Strategic well-informed engagement in the sharing economy that unlocks the values and benefits of sharing could contribute to increased inclusion and more efficient and fair use of resources in the local context (Hodkinson et al., 2017; Richardson, 2015). However, the fact that limited attention has been given to the underlying prerequisites for how the public tourism sector can develop a well-informed, holistic and strategic governance that would lead to more robust governance in the context of tourism calls for further investigation (Bramwell & Lane, 2011; Dredge & Jamal, 2015). As pointed out by Dredge (2017), the policy discourse of initiatives such as the sharing economy is crucial and hence, the critical evaluation of policy discourses around these novel sustainability alternatives is of paramount importance. Not least understandings of “the origin and values of the knowledge that is being reproduced and for what purposes” (Dredge, 2017; Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015).

In light of the widespread rise of sharing initiatives and, given its importance as a capacity-builder, it is crucial to understand the role of public governance in the promotion of the tourism sharing economy (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015, 2017; Gössling & Michael Hall, 2019). One key argument for conducting this study is the need for deeper insights into how the public tourism organisation manoeuvres in the transition from traditional growth values to sharing values. Hence, an in-depth investigation of public governance, specifically with a focus on the public tourism organisation's engagement in community-based sharing concepts, is proposed. The aim of this study is to undertake an in-depth investigation into the evolution of one tourism sharing economy concept initiated and implemented by a public tourism organisation in Sweden, focusing on the factors driving and hampering change from traditional tourism growth to a sharing business logic. Three sub-questions frame the study: Why does a public tourism organisation engage in the sharing economy? How is success defined in the project? Which core values evolve and are negotiated as the concept unfolds?

The paper proceeds in four steps. First, the application of a theoretical framework of evolutionary economic geography as an analytical lens is explained. In the following section, the research design and methodological considerations are presented, followed by the findings and a discussion highlighting the evolution of the sharing concept. The last section contains concluding remarks and policy implications for future tourism development in the context of the sharing economy.

Theoretical framework

The theoretical idea, which drives this study concerns the value of a deeper understanding of the complexity of destination governance in the face of sustainable development (see for example Gill & Williams, 2017). Consequently, the aim is to move from descriptive studies to analysis, bringing forward the critical questions of “how” and “why” regarding the sharing economy and tourism development (Brouder, 2014). The tourism sharing economy's impact on local communities is defined as one key emerging issue in the field of tourism evolutionary economic geography. One example of this is how the tourism accommodation and transport sectors have changed dramatically in response to phenomena such as Airbnb and Über (Debbage, 2018). Another example is the mushrooming of sharing economy initiatives focusing on locals offering tours off the beaten tracks (Richards & Russo, 2016).

As pointed out by Britton (1991) in his seminal work, tourism is not an isolated discrete sub-system, but needs to be framed in the broader context of regional development. This argument can be linked to more recent studies on sustainable tourism innovation (Hjalager, 2002) and tourism planning and policy (e.g. Dredge & Jenkins, 2011; Dredge & Jamal, 2015; Henriksen & Halkier, 2009). Consequently, the tourism sharing economy is not only fixed in space but also embedded in complex spatial networks (Ioannides et al., 2014). Here evolutionary economic geography (EEG) offers an analytical framework (for an overview, see Brouder et al., 2017). The theoretical underpinnings of the EEG approach are threefold, building up an analytical framework based on the following assumptions: that local economies are complex multi-layered systems; that history matters and; that local development is shaped by interactions both between agents and the landscape in which they are situated in (Boschma & Martin, 2007, 2010; Brouder & Eriksson, 2013). Hence, institutional and spatial complexity and evolution over time are considered crucial factors in the analysis of the development of sharing economy concepts in tourism (cf. Lindström, 2018). In the current study three concepts are applied as analytical tools: path dependency, path creation and path plasticity.

The concept of path dependency implies that past knowledge trajectories influence current decision-making and consequently, have a strong influence on strategic decision-making in the public policy, planning and management of for example a tourist destination. Path dependency leads to self-reinforcing destination development with a strong competence base embedded in previous experiences – a so-called lock-in with a dominating evolutionary path of success. Therefore, the notion of path dependency is considered important and a crucial factor for explaining regional success. However, evolutionary knowledge creation could also be a limitation in the sense that it neglects alternative paths to the dominant one, leading to so-called negative lock-in (Strambach, 2010).

However, while path dependence is inevitable and of key relevance to understanding the evolution of tourism development, attention has more recently been paid to deliberately created change and the role of human agency in such processes and how it brings about new concepts and strategies (Gill & Williams, 2017). Hence, the concept of path creation refers to the development of new pathways through stakeholders’ ability to mobilise resources to create change (Garud & Karnøe, 2001). The concepts of path dependence and path creation complement each other as the former stresses continuity of the organisation by stabilising the behaviour and guiding actions of stakeholders, while the latter stresses “creative destruction” and the breaking of stability and the creation of a new order (Garud & Karnøe, 2001; Strambach, 2010).

A third theoretical concept of relevance is path plasticity, referring to gradual dynamic changes that might lead to path creation (Alchian & Woodward, 1988; Martin, 2010). An organisation's plasticity is dependent on its “interpretative flexibility”. Generally, formal, regulative organisations demonstrate a low level of this flexibility while organisations operating in strong co-evolution with other organisations provide a rich environment for change (Strambach, 2010). Furthermore, the geographical context in which the organisation is situated plays a key role in the degree of plasticity (Strambach, 2010). Place-specific characteristics related to traditions of co-evolution within the tourism sector and between the tourism sector and other sectors in the regional context are of vital importance to knowledge spill-over, leading to the gradual evolution of new pathways (Brouder & Fullerton, 2017; Larsson & Lindström, 2014).

The EEG concepts introduced in the theoretical framework are applied as a “lens” through which to analyse the development of the selected tourism sharing economy concept (in the context of the Scandinavian/Swedish public sector) (Gill & Williams, 2011; Larsson & Lindström, 2014; Lindström, 2018). In the following section, the research design and methodological considerations are presented.

Study methods

Empirical data was collected between November 2016 and November 2018 in a narrative case study relating to the evolution of the sharing concept Meet the Locals (MTL) employed by the regional tourism organisation of West Sweden. MTL was initiated by the regional tourism organisation under study, financially supported by the region through a pilot project. The purpose of this particular sharing concept is to promote the sharing of local residents’ experiences with visitors and other locals through a digital platform hosted by the public tourism organisation. As stated on the website: “Sharing is the core […]. Everything from individuals sharing their interests to community initiatives where our resources can be used efficiently through sharing and borrowing”. Drawing on previous attempts to define the sharing economy in tourism, one could argue that MTL is the combination of an attempt to promote a new economic logic and an opportunity to jump on the techno-social trend leading to new forms of consumption (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015).

Gill and Williams (2011, 2017) suggest the narrative case study as a relevant method for the study of path dependence in the regional context (see also for example Larsson & Lindström, 2014; Lindström, 2018). Primary and secondary data in the form of strategic documents, meeting observations/participations, and interviews were collected and analysed, focusing on a deeper contextual understanding of the stages involved in the process of the evolution of the sharing concept (c.f. Bryman, 2016; Gilgun, 1994).

The intensive research was undertaken as part of a three-year embedded research project starting in November 2016 (Flexit),¹ and specifically during two years of employment (between 2016 and 2018) by the regional tourist organisation. Characteristic features of embedded research are the researcher's dual affiliation, i.e. immersion with the host organisation and affiliation with an academic institution. Such “in-between-ness” created a unique opportunity to become part of the organisation's daily work and to get to know the staff, daily routines, norms and cultures while concurrently maintaining the critical stance and autonomy necessary to my role as a researcher (Dredge & Hales, 2012; Vindrola-Padros et al., 2017).

The challenges of carrying out embedded research are the double roles of the researcher and the management of the complex expectations of both the organisation and the academy with respect to the research outcomes. Clear guidelines and the researcher's individual reflexivity are keys to successful embedded research (Lewis & Russell, 2011; Vindrola-Padros et al., 2017). The concept of bracketing, i.e. “looking beyond preconceptions”, was applied as a strategy to avoid bias in the intensive research process (Tufford & Newman, 2012). This means a reflexive research process striving for transparency and explicitness was maintained. Here the design of the Flexit research project was an opportunity to bring out and elaborate biases throughout the project. Being an insider for two years meant that there was time to build trust, understanding and to establish routines for knowledge exchange with members of the tourist organisation, and to develop the role of “critical friend”. In addition, memos documenting observations, thoughts, and reflections were an important part of the process, not least as a strategy for maintaining focus as a researcher.

The framework of the empirical research is the Swedish public governance context, specifically at the regional level and the public regional tourism organisation's engagement in the sharing economy as a sustainability transition strategy. The empirical focus is relevant for a number of reasons. First, the system of governance is characterised as a market-oriented welfare democracy with an extensive public sector (Alestalo et al., 2009). The Nordic System has often drawn praise, largely due to its principle of universal social rights, commitment to equality, and a strong state. New social movements have thrived in Scandinavian social welfare states such as Sweden, with environmentalism and feminism, for example, gaining widespread support (Alestalo et al., 2009). The Nordic countries also generally perform well in diverse global rankings in competitiveness, productivity, transparency, and so on. However, with the growth of neoliberal public management across the world in recent decades, questions have been raised over the efficiency of the welfare state both internationally but also in Sweden. As pointed out by, for example, Henriksen and Halkier (2009), typical of North-western European public policies promoting the development of tourist destinations are the so-called localised marketing strategies and the acknowledgement of social and environmental sustainability issues at a societal level, which in turn filter through public institutions and the private sector (Brandal et al., 2013).

Findings

In accordance with evolutionary economic geography (e.g. Gill & Williams, 2017; Larsson & Lindström, 2014), path-creating moments in the evolution of the sharing concept are of key relevance in the analysis. On an overall level, these are defined as “the start-up”, “the breakthrough” and, “the crossroad” and, will frame the presentation of the results. Each moment is enacted over a period of approximately one year.

The start-up (year 1)

Three significant exogenous and endogenous factors are defined as critical change events triggering the start-up and path constitution of the sharing concept (Sydow et al., 2012). Together they trigger the unlocking of financial constraints, business opportunities, and a local platform for the concept to evolve within the sharing economy.

The first factor is a combination of trends highlighting sharing at the local level. This is about the general interest in the sharing economy in Swedish society (SOU, 2017a, p. 26, 2017b, p. 95) in combination with the growing interest in the sharing economy in tourism on a more global scale, which reflects the notion of a “localisation” of tourist products and the growing demand for authentic experiences off-the-beaten-track (cf. Russo & Richards, 2016). Existing similar staycation and meet-with-a-local concepts are highlighted in the project description as successful role models, business opportunities, and strategies to engage in sustainably developing and managing tourism.

Second, the opportunity to apply for funding from the regional development fund supporting projects in line with the regional goals of sustainable growth and development (including a shift to a circular economy), unlocks the financial opportunity to carry through a project involving uncertainty and risk-taking. Hence, this also means the potential freedom to be explorative and innovative and to think and act outside the normal business model of the tourism organisation and the tourism sector. In the application submitted to the regional development fund, the tourism organisation stated that the sharing concept would lead to long-term regional effects such as positive environmental impacts as well as social inclusion.

Third, and parallel with the development of the concept, the notion of the sharing economy is gaining ground both in the region of West Sweden, but also on a national level. The establishment of a great number of public and private initiatives under the umbrella term “Sharing-city” (www.sharingcities.se) has increased the interest in alternatives to traditional consumerism in society in general. As a consequence, Gothenburg, the regional urban centre, has become a sharing city. This means Gothenburg is part of the national programme for sharing economies in cities, aiming at positioning Sweden as a country that actively and critically works with the sharing economy, for example through the development of testbeds. The links between the sharing city and the West Sweden tourism organisation and the MTL concept are not particularly strong at this point; however networking between the project leaders of the two projects is established and the collaborative value will grow as the projects evolve.

At this point, the MTL project leader's strong belief in the project's potential to become a serious community-based project with the active involvement of local people in the making of the concept stands out. She is also very clear with that in order to implement a bottom-up approach it is critical to develop an alternative business model corresponding to the non-profit and locals-as-agents logics of the concept. Hence, the role of human agency in creating change is significant. Nevertheless, as the next evolutionary stage indicates, this is not without resistance from the dominant path of tourism development (Garud & Karnøe, 2001; Garud et al., 2010; Gill & Williams, 2017; see also Henriksen & Halkier, 2009).

The breakthrough (year 2)

A period of intense internal development work follows. The project leader seeks to break free from established practices and structures, elaborating alternative strategies to engage with locals and to market the concept. Importantly, at this point, the project was rather anonymous, both within and outside the tourism organisation. However, as the project is launched the situation changes dramatically. At the launch, the media response is massive: local and national and even international media highlights the concept. In the wake of this media attention, the tourism organisation receives a great number of invitations to conferences and events in the tourism sector to present the sharing concept. Overall, the main focus of this overwhelming attention revolves around the unique opportunity to meet with locals and to get an authentic experience of the tourist destination off-the-beaten-track, yet with the notion of sharing as a strategy for tourism growth rather than a strategy for inclusion and community-based tourism (cf. Russo & Richards, 2016).

About the same time as the concept is launched, the national destination marketing organisation stresses “the local” when marketing the country abroad. Campaigns such as “Roaming Sweden”, “Live like local” and “The 72-hour cabin” (Visit Sweden) promotes “the local” in different ways. The national marketing body approaches the regional tourism organisation and collaboration is established with the purpose of incorporating the sharing concept, including a selection of the locals, into international marketing of Sweden.

At this time, the sharing concept is considered a great success by the tourism organisation, mainly due to media attention, website traffic and, partly through the interest from the national destination marketing organisation. Nevertheless, the reality is that no local person received a visit in association with the sharing concept. Hence, the notion of success is linked to publicity, legitimacy among other tourist organisations, and increased traffic to the tourism organisation's website. However, after more time passed, the number of locals grew and apparently a growing number of visitors started to show interest in the opportunity to meet with a local. This can be considered an intentionally organic process; however, it was possibly boosted by the media attention described above.

The crossroad (year 3)

The extreme media attention combined with the organic upward movement of the actual concept, i.e. visitors meeting with locals (above all manifested through the growing network of locals), creates a crucial crossroad in the concept's evolutionary path. On the one hand, the concept unfolds as an opportunity for the tourism organisation to grow strong as a mainstream tourism organisation, through the attention and legitimacy the “buzz” around this unique initiative creates. On the other hand, the innovative business model under development presented a genuine opportunity to shift away from neo-liberal and tourism-centric strategies (Brouder, 2018; Saarinen, 2006). However, tension is created between the two alternative paths that were evolving.

As a result and, as a strategy to move forward, a workshop is initiated with the purpose of elaborating the core values of the concept and further future strategic paths of the initiative. The workshop participants are representatives of the tourism organisation and the municipality's sharing economy, e.g. Sharing City (www.sharingcitiessweden.se). Results from the workshop indicate the importance of, on the one hand, the value of internal sharing economy knowledge capacity building and, on the other hand, the value of linking the concept/project to broader regional structures and sharing economy initiatives. Furthermore, the value of developing tourism products with locals as agents of change is discussed, hence avoiding so-called “sharewashing” (Hawlitschek et al., 2018). The values of appropriate strategies and business models adapted to the sharing economy are elaborated as well as tools to evaluate the impact of tourism sharing concepts beyond traditional growth metrics.

Discussion

The room to manoeuvre towards a more sustainable destination development form is constantly contested by mainstream paths, dependent on a range of endogenous and exogenous forces and how they interact in time and space (Gill & Williams, 2017). Furthermore, the ability to seize opportunities and learning, sometimes through failure (Hall, 2011), is of key relevance for successful path creation towards sustainability (in this case the transition towards the sharing economy). The in-depth investigation of the evolution of an innovative alternative (possibly leading to sustainability) tourism concept offers a deeper understanding of the complex environment in which the public tourism organisation operates (Brouder & Eriksson, 2013; Lindström, 2018). The embedded research conducted demonstrates a number of key path creative events/conditions in the evolution of the sharing concept.

First, the meaning and value of the notion of the sharing economy and its applicability in tourism is produced, re-produced and negotiated by the tourism organisation and in the wider regional context. Here the complex dynamic conception of the tourism organisation's internal sustainability work reveals how the value of the concept is negotiated through the interplay of individual (project leader), organisational (corporate business model) and societal influences (global tourism and regional sharing economy). Hence, it shows how human agency, individual and collective, is central to understanding the process of path creation (Garud & Karnøe, 2001; Gill & Williams, 2017).

Second, Richards and Russo’s (2016) observation that “the local” has become the new authentic in the tourism experience is of paramount relevance to understanding what triggers change towards the sharing economy in the process. The notion of the locals as agents in the tourism product unlocks the tourism organisation's interest in community-based strategies, as opposed to mainstream activity-based strategies (Saarinen, 2006). Furthermore, such path creation triggers embedded relationships between previously distant stakeholders in the sharing economy.

In spite of several strong path creative forces in the evolution of the concept, it is evident the tourism organisation cannot “shake free” of its history (Arthur, 1989; David, 1985). As pointed out in the literature, path dependence can work as a success factor; however, it can also lead to lock-in situations blocking the organisation from new path creation (e.g. Strambach, 2010). In the case of the tourism organisation's engagement in the sharing economy, a predominating lock-in is the activity-based paradigm typical of the tourism sector (Saarinen, 2006), a lock-in that is political, structural and cognitive in nature (Gill & Williams, 2017; Grabher, 1993). Due to the fact that the traditional business model of destination management organisations relies on tourism growth and hence, metrics such as number of visitors, jobs and entrepreneurs, sustainability work (e.g. engagement in the sharing economy) tends to become a “social trap” (McCool et al., 2013). Hence it can be argued that there are inherent tensions between a desire to achieve short-term industry-oriented goals and the long-term goals of sustainability (e.g. sustaining the environment is inconsistent with increasing the number of visitors). Daunorienė et al. (2015) pinpoints these tensions and how they are articulated specifically in relation to the sharing economy. Consequently, it could be argued that these locked-in ways of thinking about tourism organisations and the “social trap” of inconsistent goals need to be explicitly confronted.

As pointed out earlier on, the notion of “the local” plays a crucial role in the path creation of the Meet the Locals concept, nevertheless, “the local” also constitutes a critical cognitive lock-in. The disrupted understanding of the notion of locals as a key resource causes a messy situation comprising: locals as a resource to reach goals of inclusion in accordance with the original idea stated in the application for regional funding, locals as agents of change in the business model, and locals as a strategy to create an image of the authentic Sweden. Apart from some overlaps, they all reflect different discourses, leading to lock-in situations expressed through misunderstanding and friction in the process of developing the sharing economy concept.

Linking the tourism sector to the wider regional context is considered a strategy for a sustainable regional development path (Gill & Williams, 2011, 2017). Joint ventures with partners who have complementary skills and learning from others through benchmarking should be regarded as a competitive advantage (Ruhanen & Cooper, 2004; Larsson & Lindström, 2014). One of the outputs of the sharing concept/project is new collaborative arrangements, inter-sectorial as well as with the civic society and local people. This should be regarded as an opportunity for the regional tourism sector to enter new networks and form partnerships with stakeholders with complementary resources. The Sharing City and local inhabitants both (though in different ways) fit into the frame of so-called “good governance”, i.e. equal and equitable distribution of resources and benefits, with social and environmental values stressed (Gill & Williams, 2017; Kemp et al., 2007).

New procedures in combination with external pressure cause gradual change that might lead to new distinctive paths in the future (Martin, 2010). However, at this stage of the process they can be observed as complementary procedures embedded in the existing dominant path of tourism development. In the case of the investigated concept, alternative marketing strategies stressing the local and the locals as agents are developed and implemented. This is not to say that such an approach is not contested by mainstream marketing norms. Furthermore, the emerging cross-sectoral co-evolution between the tourism organisation and the Sharing City and other regional sharing economy initiatives brings new knowledge and opens up opportunities for alternative and intertwined perspectives on tourism and the sharing economy, possibly leading to a new path of tourism development (cf. Larsson & Lindström, 2014). As pointed out by Brouder and Fullerton (2017), the notion of co-evolution stresses the complexity of destination development and consequently, the value of including broader conceptualisations of stakeholders and institutions in the analysis of the evolution of alternative tourism concepts.

Referring to Giddens’concept of “duality of structures”, Strambach (2010) highlights the “interpretative flexibility” of institutional meaning, and hence how members (specifically the MTL project leader) of the tourism organisation use the public institution as a toolkit. Of paramount interest is how such plasticity is created through the elastic stretch of the tourism organisation as a public organisation. In other words, this relates to how the regional ownership and mission, including the financial opportunity of the project and public access to information in accordance with Swedish law as well as links to national-level public sustainability visions, open up opportunities for innovative processes of alternative tourism.

Concluding remarks and policy implications

This study has explored the public tourism organisation's adaptability to the logic of the sharing economy, specifically the concept of “Meet the Locals” (cf. Richards & Russo, 2016). The sharing economy is an opportunity for the tourism sector to become more sustainable. Nevertheless, it is associated with several challenges that can be related to the fuzziness of the concept of sharing and its application (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015; Gössling & Michael Hall, 2019) and to the dominating growth paradigm (Brouder, 2018; Saarinen, 2006).

The study brings forward the complexity of destination governance transition and, the value of unpacking sharing initiatives. By introducing a theoretical approach that stresses a deeper and more contextual understanding of tourism development in the face of a growing interest in the sharing economy (Brouder, 2014; Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2017), the study has provided insights into the complexity of the public tourism organisation's ambivalence when approaching alternative sustainable tourism strategies.

The study confirms previous research focusing on the general problem of a neo-liberal bias in tourism governance (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015, 2017; Gill & Williams, 2017). However, it also showcases interesting insights into how the notion of the sharing economy is implemented in the public tourism sector through creative initiatives and the ambition to break free from the established tourism-centric discourse (Saarinen, 2006). One important contribution of this paper is the insights into how the public tourism organisation navigates in such an environment. Consequently, the documented case proves the value of the Scandinavian tourism governance context and its potential to adapt to alternative concepts, but also the risk of “sharewashing” in such governance context (Hawlitschek et al., 2018).

Consequently, the Scandinavian tourism governance model needs to be further and more systematically explored to better understand the risks and opportunities of the localised marketing strategies, engagement in sustainability and collaborative arrangements typical for tourism development in the tourism sharing economy context (Brandal et al., 2013; Henriksen & Halkier, 2009). In accordance with the evolutionary economic geography tradition, the ability to “break free from history” is a key to change (Arthur, 1989; David, 1985). Hence, scrutiny of existing regional tourism governance organisational structures, routines, business models, skills and competences and how they foster and/or hamper the transition towards sustainable development are of vital importance. One key challenge in public tourism governance is to successfully implement sustainability goals and to avoid the lock-in of market-oriented neoliberal managerialism, ending up in the “social trap” described by McCool et al. (2013) or in what Saarinen (2006) defines as activity-based solutions to complex sustainability challenges (see also Hall, 2019). Consequently, the need to develop strategies for dynamic interactions with regional surrounding agents, e.g. is to formalise rules and foster a culture that makes knowledge exchange between the tourism sector and other sectors in the region more efficient should be a priority in tourism governance (Brouder, 2018; Brouder & Eriksson, 2013; Larsson & Lindström, 2014). The sharing economy could leverage such inter-sectoral collaborations and contribute to more a holistic tourism governance.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The research reported in this article was undertaken as part of a Flexit research programme, funded by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond 2016-2020.

Notes

1 For further information about the design of Flexit see www.rj.se/en/