Reworking Tourism: Diverse Economies in a Changing World

KEYWORDS:

• Alternative economies
• sustainable tourism
• futures
• progress
• post-industrialism

It is becoming increasingly clear that we need alternative and diverse ontologies of tourism to help unlock and reposition it as something more than profit, jobs, and growth. The dominant discourses promulgated by international organisations, such as the UNWTO, continue to focus on tourism’s contribution to growth, where profit and economic diversification are somehow linked to socio-economic progress and, perhaps, even the happiness and well-being of local communities (UNWTO, 2018). This is a simplistic logic underpinned by a dogged belief in trickle-down economics, (Lawson, 2016) that profit generates jobs, that growth is good, and that “progress” is, first and foremost, a Modernist economic project (Wagner, 2010). The problem is, that there is no evidence to suggest that trickle-down economics works (Piketty, 2014), and there is increasing agreement that “progress” is more than simple metrics focusing on economic growth, investment, and jobs. Indeed, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) interpret progress in a range of areas including access to basic needs (e.g. food, water, health, clean energy, education, equity, justice), entrée to and participation in good governance, and the maintenance of ecosystem health (United Nations, 2015). The question is how can we incorporate and value these and other dimensions of progress in our social and economic organisation given the dominance of twentieth-century capitalism? A reworking of the traditional ways we conceive the economic organisation of tourism (and the economy more broadly) is needed. Adopting a complex, dynamic, pluralist and multifaceted view of tourism, in this Special Issue, we explore the diverse economies of tourism for a changing world.

The need for a new dialogue about diverse economies

Calls to build alternative models to capitalism are certainly not new, with a long line of philosophical debate centring on alternative forms of economic-political organisation; alternative value creation mechanisms; new, hybrid, and alternative forms of exchange; and resource sharing arrangements (Gritzas & Kavoulakos, 2016). Gibson-Graham’s acclaimed books The End of Capitalism (as we knew it) (1996) and A Post-Capitalist Politics (2006) have opened up a new and powerful discursive space that links the social economy with the transformative potential of social movements. Their contributions, and those of their colleagues, lay open a radical and optimistic view of the importance and contributions of diverse economic spaces, and in doing so, have initiated fruitful discussions on how “economy” already is, or can be, done differently.

In an effort to excavate alternative economic spaces, Gibson-Graham (1996, 2006), Healy (2009) and others take as their starting point the need to understand the hegemony and global pervasiveness of twentieth-century capitalism. Drawing from a Marxist tradition, they sought to disentangle relationships between capital, labour, and resources as a means of identifying, opening up and activating radical alternative economic spaces. According to Gritzas and Kavoulakos (2016), one key contribution in this work was to call attention to the essentialist narratives of capitalism, globalisation, and development, which tend to treat the flows and power of capital as a dominant and all-encompassing force. Other kinds of transactions, economic spaces, and non-monetised resources are rendered invisible in the process. By excavating alternative spaces, they were able to draw attention to other kinds of transactions (e.g. unpaid labour, in-kind transactions, gifting, sharing, collaboration, virtual, etc.) and alternative economic spaces (e.g. informal economies, community co-operatives, etc.).

We do not have to look too closely at tourism to realise that there is an array of alternative economic spaces in tourism. Our rationale for wanting to explore these diverse economies of tourism is that they are likely to be spaces in which important non-financial resources are created and maintained. These resources can include social capital, community cohesion, reflexivity, creativity, problem-solving, and so on, that contribute to broader notions of progress, and move us towards sustainable development.

The introduction and rapid spread of digital technologies have hastened a range of economic and social transformations, and have opened up a range of new economic spaces beyond those which Gibson-Graham (1996, 2006) could have imagined. On the one hand, platform capitalism, fed by venture capital (Dredge 2017) has led a wave of innovation that has increased consumer access, reduced barriers to entry for entrepreneurs, and radically altered the way that tourism products and services are brought to market, purchased, and consumed. On the other hand, the backlash against exploitative platform capitalism by communities and increasingly resistant consumers has stimulated the reclaiming of collaborative commons and alternative digital marketplaces, reinforcing the reality that alternative economic spaces can also exist in, and alongside, the digital tourism landscape.

In tourism, at least in the Global North, the excavation of alternative economic and political spaces has tended to be located at the margins of political and social discourses (Mosedale, 2011). This is perhaps not surprising given seven decades of tourism growth wherein business-as-usual capitalism has dominated. However, the pressing need to adapt to change, and the growing backlash against extractive and exploitative forms of tourism typified by overtourism and platform capitalism has fuelled anti-tourism activism, ignited a need to rethink the status quo, and to activate change. The commons movement (Bauwens & Niaros, 2018), and the Barcelona Declaration on Tourism and Cultural Heritage (Generalitat de Catalunya, 2014) are initiatives in a growing grass-roots movement towards unlocking and valuing diverse economic spaces, modes of exchange, and diverse forms of value creation.

The Global South has much to teach the Global North if the articles in this issue are any indication. The reality is that capitalism has proven to be sticky and highly resistant, and the dominant focus on the flows and effects of capital have effectively silenced attention on alternative and diverse economic spaces. Many actors in the Global South are resourceful and creative in opening up alternative economic-political spaces in which not only has tourism flourished, but people and communities occupy a range of worldviews, cultures, and ontologies that differ from, but also highlight, a range of benefits, beyond the economic.

Contributions in this special issue

The call for papers for this special issue drew a variety of contributions from very different contexts and corners of the globe. Aspects such as tourism co-operatives (Amoamo, Ruckstuhl and Ruwhiu; Meged and Gyimóthy), the commons collaborative economy (Cannas), and alternative value creation (Cannas) have been excavated. Despite being quite different in context, these papers highlight ways that tourism can be part of wider systems of value creation, labour practices, and exchange that are not necessarily monetised nor conform to traditional capitalist modes of production. Additionally, Amoamo, Ruckstuhl, and Ruwhiu discuss the relational attributes of economic-political spaces between indigenous value, societal goals and western notions of enterprise, raising awareness of the importance of collaboration and stable relationships. Meged and Gyimóthy illustrate intersections between communitarian altruism and micro-entrepreneurial logics wherein idle rural resources are used to reshape relationships between local communities and outsiders.

Common in many of the papers in this special issue are a number of themes: First, authors noted an artificial dichotomy between “alternative” and “traditional” economy, which is not necessarily a binary divide. Most authors prefer the notion of diverse economies, acknowledging that diverse social-economic-political spaces co-exist and operate simultaneously in, alongside, and at arms-length from more traditional business-as-usual models of tourism (see Hughes and Scheyvens; Pecot, Gavilanes, and Saenz de Viteri, Meged and Gyimóthy). Even in contexts such as the Ecuadorial beach zone explored by Pecot, Gavilanes, and Saenz de Viteri, classifications of formal and informal economies were found to be misleading and that formal/informal variegations and hybridity exist. Similarly, Balslev Clausen and Velásquez found that even in the socialist context of Cuba, market mechanisms such as internationally pegged currencies are incorporated into the social economy to create diverse hybrid tourism economies.

Second, the organisation of tourism is socially enacted and culturally embedded within networks (Cave and Koloto 2015), and that indigenous values shape enterprise outcomes (Amoamo, Ruckstuhl and Ruwhiu). Further, diverse forms of value creation and exchange reflect local priorities and concerns in a global system (Hughes and Scheyvens; Pecot, Gavilanes, and Saenz de Viteri; Cannas). Cater, Low and Keirle examine mobility and exchange in an international field trip, finding that the nature of exchange in tourism cannot be reduced to the monetised tourism system. Moreover, in their case, mobility was also problematised along monetised/non-monetised lines and the institutional barriers to more diverse, interactive exchanges and value creation were worthy of note.

Third, while grassroots communitarian collectives can mobilise private, public, commercial and non-commercial actors, long-term scalability may require traditional funding mechanisms for infrastructure or other support (Meged and Gyimóthy). In other words, it appears that diverse economies acknowledge the interplay of, and need for, financial and non-financial support mechanisms leading to the idea that we are not moving from one to another type of economic organisation (i.e. capitalist to post-capitalist), but hybrid economies are emerging.

Fourth, diverse economies in tourism should not be thought of as yet another niche area of research and academic “space claiming” by researchers eager to mark their contribution. Rather, the papers within this special issue have demonstrated that the diverse economies lens can help us progress sustainable development goals in both big and small business. Tham and Evers-Swindell, for example, highlight how different forms of exchange, monetised and non-monetised value creation, as well as diverse labour practices can take place in large and globally competitive corporate spaces. Further, Hughes and Scheyvens and Tham and Evers-Swindell have illustrated that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is entangled within diverse economies perspectives.

Finally, our aim in excavating the diverse (but often creative, progressive, reflexive, resourceful and resilient) economies of tourism in this Special Issue was to lay the foundations for greater engagement in hopeful and sustainable tourism futures. We do not propose a radical post-capitalist future, at least not in the short or medium terms, but see a transition ahead as tourism actors are confronted with significant and transformative challenges. The traditional economic focus will give way to hybrid social-political-economic practices and diverse organisational forms. Some of these will take the shape of communitarian CBT initiatives, and others in the digital tourism space. Yet other forms of this diverse economy will unfold in the CSR space as businesses confront the need to generate non-monetary value to address sustainability issues.

If the aim is to engage with diverse values in which individuals, communities, and enterprises in tourism and hospitality can flourish, then it will be important to open up discourse and understanding about alternative logics in tourism; to authenticate and appreciate different value creation systems; to configure organisational logics; and to encourage alternative modes of exchange. We need diverse economies for people and planet. As activist researchers and educators beyond the university and in our communities in both North and South, we have a role in facilitating, experimenting and co-creating these alternative economies of tourism, and in the process, reworking tourism for a changing world.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.