Tourism Recreation Research

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrr20

Economies of attention and the design of viable

tourism futures

Rodanthi Tzanelli

To cite this article: Rodanthi Tzanelli (2023) Economies of attention and the
design of viable tourism futures, Tourism Recreation Research, 48:4, 605-615, DOI:
10.1080/02508281.2023.2188708

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2023.2188708

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 28 Mar 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 599

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rtrr20
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH
2023, VOL. 48, NO. 4, 605–615
https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2023.2188708

Economies of attention and the design of viable tourism futures

Rodanthi Tzanelli
School of Sociology and Social Policy & Mobilities, Bauman Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The present article focuses on three dominant forms of crisis in the twenty-first century (terrorism, Received 7 March 2022
climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic) that challenge tourism as a viable activity and sector. Accepted 27 February 2023
Through epistemological/methodological blends of compatible arguments from the sociology of
KEYWORDS
knowledge (Karl Mannheim’s notion of world-vision or Weltanschauung, which emphasises Affect; crisis; paradigm;
planetary ways of knowing), the new mobilities paradigm (Sheller’s suggestion that such refrain; style; worldmaking
‘knowing’ also produces often competing positionalities and communities in research) and
scholarship on the worldmaking powers of tourism (Hollinshead’s and Hollinshead and
Suleman’s suggestion that knowing about tourism comes to life when it is enunciated as a
reality), it investigates ‘affective refrains’: recurring scholarly discourses about crises in the
sector, which are endowed with affective qualities (Felix Guattari’s approach to preconscious
formations of feelings). Such refrains, which are both prepersonal and structured like collective
imaginaries, shed light on the core ethical and moral universes that are supported by their
authors. Whereas the nature of the themes covered by these authors is the modus operandi of
the scholarly community to which they claim membership. But more importantly, the styles
they use to intensify the attention of audiences/readerships to these styles organises the
powers of affective persuasion into a paradigm.

Introduction
management of human life particularly), ecological
Tourism analysis seems to progressively concentrate on (with an emphasis on the generation of rules about
the future of tourism as an activity and a multi-industry. the management of dwelling territories, including the
The trigger seems to be distributed across at least three environmental) and cybernetic (with an emphasis on
types of crisis, which threaten the tourist sector’s viabi- the digital-infrastructural organisation of social realities)
lity: terrorism, climate change and the COVID-19 pan- as evident in the articles of this special issue. Neverthe-
demic. Tourism and hospitality seem to be facing less, interests communicate worldviews which even-
certain death, according to some scholars (Korstanje, tually make (contribute to the design of) worlds of
2018a, 2018b). However, before anyone agrees that tourism (Hollinshead, 2009b). The emphasis on world-
tourism and hospitality are reaching ‘a dead end’, an views or Weltanschauungen (to use Karl Mannheim’s
investigation is necessary into why things are pro- (1936/1968) term) informs a deeper analysis of plane-
nounced as such or otherwise and how scholars identify tary-futuristic paradigms. In tourism analysis ‘paradigms’
moral actants and agents in assemblages of human and are framed in a Kuhnian social-scientific discourse (Kuhn,
natural ecologies. Crucially, even when tourism scholar- 1962), which favours an understanding of their function
ship proposes solutions to such terminal problems, the as action frameworks (Jennings, 2012). From there, scho-
moral texture on which such arguments are plotted lars are asked to demonstrate commitment to a meth-
seems to persist. odological orientation, which in the field of tourism
The article takes a closer look at the programmes of connects to three trends: interpretivism, positivism and
different scholarly communities with an interest in the critical analysis (Tribe, 2001). Drawing on Thomas
futures of tourism. Fuller’s (2011, 2012) suggest that in Kuhn’s approach to scientific revolution, Jamal and
the twenty-first century human ‘interests’ are divided Munar (2016) see the role of paradigms as ways for a
into biopolitical (with an emphasis on the political community to apposition itself in the field of practice

CONTACT Rodanthi Tzanelli [email protected] University of Leeds, 12.04 Social Sciences Woodhouse Lane Leeds, Yorkshire LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-
nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built
upon in any way. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
606 R. TZANELLI

(tourism studies), which have a durable influence in conceptually; however, as a process (of what we may
research and practice. However, a paradigm is the call ‘becoming’ a thing or a sentient being), it retains
effect of peripheral (pará [παρά = nearby and around]) both formal (institutional, public) and informal (intimate,
pointing/orientation (deikneíō [δεικνείω]), a mobility private) qualities. Because affects link the precognitive to
device that delineates our field of movement as this is the rational and conscious domain, they are involved in
shaped by visions of the future. The field itself cannot the early stages of making public culture. To bring to dis-
be ‘proven’ factually in positivist ways, nor can it be course such pre-personal constants in declarations of
reduced to subjective interpretations, because at the risks, crises, ends and beginnings in/of tourism and/or
same time it exists independently from its enunciators hospitality, the temporal ‘texture’ of the said ‘events’
(within communities of practice). A critical approach is (disasters and beginnings) must also be examined
also not enough when it reduces the field of interrog- (Stern, 2004). Temporal textures or ‘contours’ allow for
ation to materialist manifestations of judgement calls declarative paradigms to reorganise an existential terri-
that are made about the state of tourism. The latter is tory (how we think and feel about bad events and
prominent in economic approaches to tourism claiming hopeful possibilities), which is no longer viable.
affiliation with critical traditions (Ibn-Mohammed et al., Reorganising declarative paradigms by taking
2021; Okafor et al., 2022), which are problematised in affective discourse seriously can shed alternative
this article. However, ‘critique’ in tourism analysis also light on ‘vulnerability’ and ‘viability’ with regards to
possesses immaterial dimensions, which move past phe- the academic field of tourism studies, but also its
nomenologies of perception and feeling. My approach is need to be enriched as an ontological and epistemo-
‘postphenomenological’ because it attends to invisible logical/methodological inquiry into planetary chal-
processes of feeling, knowing, and valuing, which even- lenges and problems. Hollinshead and Suleman’s
tually shape the world around us materially. To reduce (2018) suggestion that we do not dismiss the ‘declara-
such processes to phenomenological or materialist tive nature’ of tourism, and thus the ways it brings to
inquiry is to miss the importance of temporality and con- life subjectively via everyday installations of practice,
tingency in the ways scholarly communities and their rather than institutionally, and organisationally
discourse come to life (see also Rosenberger & places, cultures, and leisure activities, is repurposed.
Verbeek, 2015). I return to this point below, as my The present article’s ‘worldmaking’ tools, which are
version of postphenomenology does not inform scholarly, may communicate with or be affected by
science and technology but posthumanist approaches the declarations/enunciations of the tourist state and
to crisis. international tourist industries in various ways. Enunci-
The article’s title dons an ‘economy of attention’ to ations/declarations refer to the realisation of ideas
suggest that what is chosen as the focal point in a para- through their articulation in appropriate contexts, in
digm constitutes a refrain, something that is repeated which they can widely circulate and even be formal-
across different publications but also different domains ised. Hollinshead (2009a) notes that the nation-state
of policy, scholarship, and even popular culture enters the field of tourismification to become an econ-
(although the latter is not addressed, because it omic force (as a ‘tourist state’) by semantically defining
belongs to a different type of futuristic design) the domains it governs as tourist sites. However,
(Deleuze & Guattari, 1988, p. 315). Refrains allow for today’s tourism mobilities are managed by more
the gathering of forces of persuasion and thus the con- blended networks of state-business partners, who
centration of attention, so as to challenge an established subject the semantic potential of tourismified worlds
argument (Bertelsen & Murphie, 2010, p. 145) – and con- (destinations) to the whims of demand. Massumi,
tinue until they assume its dominant position and may (2002, p. 24) calls such arbitrary negotiations of iden-
need to be challenged in turn. This means that refrains tity/meaning the ‘crossing [of] semantic wires’,
are pre-personal affective forces existing even within because they produce new worldmakings (or Wel-
declared (and thus consciously articulated) futurist para- tanschauungen), which are not always amenable to
digms. Affects are phenomena emerging between sen- local needs and desires to autonomy from the calls of
sorial and cognitive engagement with external commercialisation. Sheller (2020, pp. 105–106) notes
environments. Although they are not consciously articu- that even academic researchers, who are often
lated emotions, they prompt humans to articulate action deemed to be in privileged positions vis-à-vis studied
in the form of value-ridden utterances and even embo- communities, are caught up in ‘bordering processes’
died performance. In this respect, they are existential that hinge on competing territorialities. In many
happenings. Broadly speaking, ‘embodiment’ refers to cases, scholarly worldmaking generates reflective and
the ways something is brought to life materially and even oppositional worlds, which assume the role of a
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 607

futuristic design modulated by affect and morality. Dominant crisis trends and their refrains
Such cross-referential networks of enunciation will be
The number of paradigms circulating in tourism studies
mapped through intense repetitions in and across
is vast, so a selection and appropriate organisation of
them. These refrains bring to life an academic existen-
‘dominant trends’ is necessary (Figure 1). The logic of
tial territory, in which ‘ends’, ‘salvations’ and ‘future
selection is based on refraining: these paradigms
beginnings’ of tourism and its industrial networks
emerge (Guattari, 1992/1995, p. 28). present the most rigorous epistemological and meth-
The second section outlines some key refrains cur- odological propositions in the field; aside their ‘reach’
rently at play in the field of tourism analysis. These or scope of judgment, scholars reiterate the necessity
refrains illuminate affective and moral textures in the to commercialise, instead of exploring the causes and
teleological rationale of the three dominant crises in consequences of tourismification in relation to interest
tourism activity and its industrial basis. Hence, the groups. The organisation develops across two primary
actual focal point is not the enunciation of vulnerabilities axes: the vertical accommodates key agencies/actancies
displayed by or within tourism, but the academic and interests. Key agency (human-driven action) and
stances’ ‘categorical style’: the externalisation and actancy (non-human action) necessitates further division
sharing of particular affects and observations in the on the basis of who or what produces movement or
form of propositions about tourism futures. The article change in tourism development (or disaster): humans,
transposes an argument originating in psychotherapy technologies and natural actants (environments, floral
(Stern, 2004, pp. 64–66) to the level of collective (para- and faunal ecosystems and so forth). These agents/
digmatic) discourse with some serious qualifications actants are then connected to different clusters of inter-
and modifications: first, it acknowledges the porosity ests (save the economy, social customs, local ecosystems
of borders between individual and collective experi- and so forth). The vertical arrangement also spreads
ences of crises as these unfold; second, it recognises across a horizontal axis presenting the three dominant
that any futural propositions gain traction only when crises: terrorism, climate change/catastrophes and pan-
they draw on possibilities. The second section elaborates demic disruptions. However, on a closer look, the hori-
on the core values guiding such complex interplays zontal axis is subjected to cross- and multi-species
between worldviews, tourism worldmaking and complexity, because of convergences and divergences
tourism imaginaries (first subsection), providing some in interests across and between actants and agents.
concluding remarks (second subsection). We end up with a diagrammatic presentation that

Figure 1. Dominant crisis trends & action.

608 R. TZANELLI

Figure 2. Dominant crisis trends & temporal discourse in academic publications.

reveals more about changes in patterns of movement more diverse interest hierarchy emerges from them:
than spatiotemporal specificities. where scholars favouring a biopolitical approach to
However, it could be argued that the horizontal natural disasters may prioritise discussions on the
spread encloses a rough atemporal genealogy of rel- human costs of climate disasters, posthuman tourism
evant discussions published in tourism analysis aca- studies scholars resort to the presentation of entangled
demic discourse (Figure 2). The older crisis trend, that effects and consequences on the earth’s systems (Grim-
of terrorism, is associated with the late 1980s and the wood et al., 2018). Infrastructural costs and the loss of
1990s political turbulence in the Middle East and later human life or a decline in labour mobilities are now rhi-
on the world-defining event of 9/11, after which terror- zomatically connected not just to the ways climate pat-
ist activity becomes an established theme in tourism terns develop. Damaging natural ecosystems also hurts
crisis management. The theme of climate change human life and productivity. Speaking of ‘hurt’ and
comes next: at first, this remains submerged in discus- ‘damage’ endows non-human life with presence and
sions of sustainability at large or dark tourism and vol- salience in crisis patterns. Finally, the effects of pan-
unteer tourism in areas affected by natural disasters. demics borrow from all the above registers, to either
However, the acceleration of natural disasters, build arguments on the need to preserve human life
especially in the second decade of the twenty-first without prejudice, or produce an etiological map of
century, promoted it to an area of analysis in its own climate change, which leads back to human avarice
right. The crisis caused by pandemics has been circulat- and capitalist exploitation of nature and human popu-
ing in other fields of scientific enquiry for a long time, lations (Lew et al., 2021).
but it only made a strong appearance in tourism analy- If ‘interests’ can be usefully arranged into biopolitical,
sis in 2020, with the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID- ecological and cybernetic (Fuller, 2011, 2012), the
19). This is the ‘surface discourse’ of the present argu- nature of agency and actancy as well as their crossovers
ment’s ‘temporal contours’. may prove to be more challenging to sort into neat cat-
Mapping the spread of studied or enunciated inter- egories. It is not just that contingency in human action
ests across these three crises provides the first cue to cannot be reduced to a simple formula of action-reaction,
the temporal contours’ submerged (‘deep’) moral but also that assemblage and actor-network theory ques-
codes. The effects of terrorism on tourism destinations tion the primacy of human agency in analyses of out-
are discussed along the lines of regional material comes in tourism. To ‘map’ variations of ‘worldmaking’
losses (including labour losses and infrastructural in tourism one may need to place capitalist development
damages in tourist destinations), cultural isolation (dis- next to feedback loops in climate systems, sustainability
ruptions in tourism’s peace-making impact, sanctions in employment, and the resilience of technological and
on the affected ‘tourist states’ by international coordi- infrastructural apparatuses (Sheller, 2009). Such sorting
nators, including travel bans in high-risk tourismified proves as difficult as the compartmentalisation of all
areas) and psychic/cultural traumas (the withdrawal of these forms of agency and actancy. In addition, this
hospitality by local hosts, as well as increasing racialisa- may collapse analysis to blame-attribution, and thus the
tion and mistrust among [Western] visitors). Analyses presentation of linear causalities, which lead to the
on the effects of climate change tend to borrow from erosion of tourist destinations as environments, commu-
all the aforementioned consequences. However, a nities, and hospitality infrastructures.
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 609

It would be useful to have a closer look at the two dia- ‘point’ at an ethics of care and responsibility for particu-
grams, with some examples from the vast literature on lar social groups and landscapes.
crises and/in tourism. Traditional understandings of the The study of crises, induced by climate change, retain a
impact of terrorist events on tourist destinations com- thin but sure connection to these refrains in the form of a
menced with victimological classifications (i.e. examin- ‘debt’ – this time to ecosystems and future generations.
ing the status of victims of actual incidents), but slowly Let us work chronologically towards the crystallisation of
moved to critical arguments focusing on the act’s spec- these refrains: two special issues in the Journal of Sustain-
tacular aspects: the ‘destruction’ of the destination’s able Tourism published in the first decade of the twenty-
(and the nation-state’s) international reputation as a cul- first century (14(4), 2006 & 18(3), 2010) call for a responsi-
tural agent (Lutz & Lutz, 2018). Dory (2021) usefully bilisation of the tourism industry and tourists to signifi-
divides the relationship between tourism and terrorism cantly reduce global emissions, alongside the need to
in relation to the focus of attacks (including those organise a global research community that produces colla-
having tourism as its key target or resulting in tourism- borative and comparative research on these issues. More
related damages in direct or indirect ways – e.g. when recently published special issues do not challenge the
airports are targeted). Significant for the collection of proposition that tourism is in a state of crisis due to the
refrains in this article is his observation that ‘the unsustainable behaviours of individuals and the tourist
foreign tourist is a kind of “ideal” victim for a terrorist industry; instead, they either critique ‘business as usual’
action conceived as a technique of violent communi- or/and move on to propose ‘sustainable’ solutions. When
cation’ (par. 5). In this respect, ‘vulnerability’ on terror- clearly associated with the critical paradigm in tourism
ism-induced crises focuses on economic interests and analysis, the nexus pushes, directly or indirectly, for
destination image management (see special issue Inter- material and/or cognitive changes in the ways the tourist
national Journal of Tourism Cities, 4(4), 2018). industry works (see special issue in the Journal of Sustain-
The exploration of ‘damaged hospitality’ from able Tourism, 29(7), 2021). The refrain clearly posits critique
without (by foreign terrorist cells) and within (the as criticism, rather than profit-orientated reflexivity.
tourist destination) informs analyses of terrorism from Solutions and traps are often identified in the same
a heritage tourism perspective (Korstanje & Séraphin, strategies, such as for example the use of ICTs, which
2020). The analytical orientation of such publications have both promoted sustainable digital travel and pro-
bifurcates: on the one hand, terrorism is connected to duced a new market with its own problems of labour
the risk of destroying heritage destinations; on the exploitation and hidden pollution costs (Gössling,
other, the very act of terrorism may generate dark 2021). However, the crux of technology as solution-
tourism (on this duality see special issue, International and-problem sits uncomfortably next to debates on
Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage, 2(1), 2014; cross-generational debts (‘we ought to hand over a pris-
Korstanje, 2014). A third refrain pertaining to commonal- tine environment to those yet to come’ [Kumm et al.,
ities between tourism and terrorism populates works on 2019]). Unlike arguments clearly directed towards
state violence (Korstanje & Clayton, 2012). Such analyses digital travel as an accessible solution for those who
purport the origins of tourism as a leisure industry in are physically immobile (Fennell, 2021), the notion of a
state strategies of labour control, including the pacifica- debt to future human populations presupposes shared
tion of union activism, which in turn are nominated ‘ter- interests with those to come. In other words, there is a
rorist’ (Korstanje et al., 2014; Tzanelli, 2011). The last dissonance in the temporal texture of such suggestions,
proposition concentrates on foreign tourists as ideal which is not realistically resolved but envisaged. Where
targets, for whom security organisations ought to this is not the investigated problem (‘datum’), placing
provide due care (Agarwal et al., 2021). We should not the climate and the disenfranchised in the same
lose sight of the panoramic picture in what ‘seems’ to bracket, as is the case with some ‘degrowing tourism’
be a collection of disparate arguments: (1) tourism is (Higgins-Desbiolles et al., 2019) and ‘regenerative
seen as the maker of a collective image, which is threa- tourism’ analyses (Scheyvens & van der Watt, 2021)
tened by an ‘outside’; (2) the vulnerable targets are may produce unintended associations with colonial
assemblages of humans and architecture; (3) as a crisis, tropes of patronage. Arguments mediating strategies
terrorism produces a collective existential nature, with of ‘climate adaptation’ do not always clarify whether
great affective potential (e.g. inducement of fear and the interests of human communities and natural/built
insecurity either at home or abroad); finally (4) the environments are balanced vis-à-vis those of industries
‘loss’ from terrorist activity in tourism contexts retains (Scott et al., 2012). In fact, these arguments retain simi-
an ambivalent role as the negation of economic com- larities with policies of terrorism prevention in tourist
pensation. These refrains are para-digmatic: they destinations as strategies of economic growth
610 R. TZANELLI

(Coca-Stefaniak & Morrison, 2018). It is important to and interdependency. Secondly, the rhythm of con-
stress that the last two propositions share in the belief sumption that these propositions favour is also slower
that tourism can act not as a collection of imaginaries than that of more established automobility-driven
about place, but a vision of ‘fair globalisation’. If realised, tourism. Some of the publications in this stream con-
such strategies of growth will allegedly allow for the tinue to address the importance of maintaining a
redistribution of wealth and the spread of democracy, multi-sensory approach to tourism, resembling the
in some cases by liberalising markets and in other by Italian philosophy of slow tourism (cittaslow – Fullagar
degrowing destinations. In sum, as is the case with the et al., 2012), which favours contact with nature and sus-
(critical) mobilities paradigm (Sheller, 2020, pp. 40–41), tainable local-global connectivity (Houge Mackenzie &
in critical tourism studies biopolitics command cyber- Goodnow, 2020). The emphasis on embodied perform-
netics and ‘tame’ existential territories (i.e. hospitable- ance in even more intense ways than those that orig-
ness). Contrariwise, in market-driven publications this inally featured in the new wave of tourism analysis
schema of subjection and ‘failed development (Sheller, (e.g. Edensor, 2000, 2001a, 2001b) is intriguing, given
2020) is supposed to offer solutions to the vulnerabilities that pandemic restrictions foreclosed or monitored
of systems of tourism services. such activity in tourism settings. Other publications
The analysis of crises induced by pandemics tends to resort to filtering the tourist experience through an
blend cybernetic, ecological and biopolitical arguments allegedly pedagogical gaze (Gretzel et al., 2020). In the
in even bolder ways. Especially between 2020 and latter cases, ‘slow’ is equated with an ethical pragmatics
2022, at stake in academic publications has been the via- of digital distance (e.g. Lapointe et al., 2020; Tzanelli,
bility of tourist industries due to the prolonged COVID- 2021a), which may be wrongly assumed to be more sus-
19 pandemic (see special issue in Sustainability, 13, tainable than embodied travel, given the actual environ-
2021; Ryu, 2021). Methodological and case-study publi- mental cost of digital footprint (Levy & Spicer, 2013).
cations with a focus on the visitor economy reproduced Because refrains produce not just scholarly worlds of
some familiar themes of risk perception by tourists, as tourism but also the styles in which such worlds ‘dance’
well as the display of resilience in consumption patterns the world to a future, it is appropriate to conclude this
(Han, 2021). The new favourite of e-tourism also section with a special issue published in the Journal of
assumed the mantle of adaptation: in the absence of Tourism Futures (7(3), 2021) under the title ‘Tourism in
physical tourism, digital technologies began to ‘move’ crisis: global threats to sustainable tourism futures’.
both destinations and the prospective tourists’ imagin- Although the theme of crisis is filtered through the
ation (see papers in special issues in Tourism Manage- window of COVID-19, the actual contributions cut across
ment, 85(4), 2021 & Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism the refrains used in all three dominant crises explored in
Research, 26(11); Page, 2021; Walters & McKercher, this article. The keywords used in the editorial article are
2021). The abrupt disruption of tourism mobilities telling: biopolitics, risk society, political ecology, COVID-
directed attention to the need to ‘reset’ the ways 19, tourism recovery, tourism justice. Indeed, the editorial
tourism is performed and catered for (Brouder, 2020). article plots futuristic enunciations in a style conforming
Portfolios for pragmatic changes in the ways people to the rules of forward movement that is unpacked in
travel include suggestions to bolster local/domestic the following section. The scholarly voices that weave
travel, ecotourism, agritourism and cybertourism as sus- the plot commence with Beck’s quintessential constructi-
tainable solutions. Interestingly, a new trend favoured a vism in ‘risk society’ (Beck, 2006), which is openly debated
model of crisis emergence and management, according as ethico-political and anthropocentric and conclude with
to which COVID-19 and the ongoing climate crisis justice frameworks. The spotlight is turned ‘on the struc-
should be studied analogically (Gössling et al., 2021; Tza- tural inequalities and violent social reproduction of subal-
nelli, 2021a). Among the most sophisticated special ternities’ in the Anthropocene (Cheer et al., 2021, p. 290).
issues stands one published in Tourism Geographies (22 At this stage, questions emerge concerning the affective
(3), 2020), with a call to think positively about cycles of core not of what is brought to light, but the community
resilience to adversity (see introductory article by Lew, that stages its polemics.
Cheer, Haywood, et al., 2020). However, what ‘resilience’
stands for is morally active in ways not spelled out.
Thus, the moral-philosophical underpinnings of such The worldmaking meta-refrain
suggestions merit further consideration. Firstly, the
Movement to the future
status and nature of beneficiaries from such changes is
not as anthropocentric as before, due to the reorienta- It would be absurd to argue that scholarship on tourism
tion of solutions to a world of posthuman movement futures has no moral/ethical or political commitment
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 611

after this presentation of crisis refrains. The question is address what happens to (human or multi-species)
how to evaluate such stances in dispassionate ways becomings, alongside how they/we can study them.
that illuminate what is considered vulnerable and how Otherwise put, the temporal texture of critical and inter-
viabilities in tourism are envisaged. Given the introduc- pretivist paradigms in tourism hides an affective com-
tion’s engagement with worldmaking, it is appropriate mitment to ontogenesis, which clashes with the
to backtrack to Hollinshead and Vellah’s (2020) discus- original epistemological framework of tourism as an
sion of the Deleuzean emergist nature of postcolonial ‘ER field’ in which patients are subjected to expert scru-
identities in tourism destinations. The stance Hollins- tiny. However, the age of crises and extinction cannot
head & Vellah adopt exemplifies Mannheim’s ‘documen- afford the excision of the expert from its material and
tary’ method, while also providing the temporal existential territories: we are part of the picture we
contours (as per Stern, 2004) of an emancipatory study in visceral ways that produce affective (intrinsic)
future (or a hopeful version of the future after colonial knowledge. This calls for the resurgence of community
domination). This camera-like vision featured in Urry’s in the ways crises are studied subjectively (by scholars)
(2016) magnum opus on visions of the future without and objectively (as an object of study). Such themes
Mannheim’s solid generational analysis. Note also that are not alien to tourism analysis in frameworks propa-
Hollinshead and Vellah’s (2020) Weltanschauung is not gating tourism as a ‘cosmopolitan vista’ (Swain, 2009),
factual but virtual, because it relies on hopeful affect: but the nature of this vista is taken for granted.
what becomes a reality in the future emerges, so we Karl Mannheim’s (1893–1947) magnum opus on
can hope and plan, but cannot predict with assurance utopia provides some helpful analytical tools to
or precision. This introduces anti-rational elements in unpack this resurgent conservatism with a small ‘c’.
their analysis associated with ideology, but it also One of the Frankfurt School scholars and a prominent
endorses social transformation, as their proposition has sociologist of knowledge, Mannheim never featured in
an orientation toward goals which are not yet attainable tourism analysis. Mannheim’s materialist phenomenol-
in reality. So, instead of disconnecting established para- ogy is epistemologically more sophisticated than
digms on tourism in crisis or the end of tourism, outlined Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer’s blended Weber-
above from utopias and imaginaries, it is better to clarify ian/Marxist/Freudian thesis on the dialectic of Enlighten-
the relationship between them. In a recent special issue ment. It also facilitates connections to post-structuralist
on affective attunements in tourism studies, Germann analyses of the ways identities and subjectivities are
Molz and Buda (2022, p. 189) explain that ‘affect is cor- formed in the flux of research (Latour, 1987). Also, Man-
poreal’, ‘but in the sense that it circulates in between nheim’s work on the relationship between utopia and
rather than residing within individual bodies’. Before ideology stands at the heart of the present discussion
tourism studies scholars learn to hope together, as an on academic refrains and existential territorialisation in
epistemic community or a collective body, they must tourism analysis. His starting point is a temporal differen-
discover that they are bound by the same affective tiation between conservative ideological formations,
movements into the future. Tourism utopias provide which are static and backward-looking, to ensure the
the contours of a type of imaginary ideal society – how preservation of tradition, and utopias, which are
society should be but is not yet. As such, they prompt forward-looking and propagating change (Mannheim,
an investigation of the ‘temporal texture’ in which they 1936/1968). The notion of ‘categorical style’ in tourism
operate as a future diagnostic (Stern, 2004). analysis introduced at the start of the article matches
The ‘problem’ (or ‘sociological datum’) in last section’s what Mannheim distributes across ideological and
refrains is how they are enunciated from an epistemo- utopian formations as forward or backward-looking
logical stance, which favours the dominant arguments visions in tourism planning. For those who want to
by John Urry (1990; Urry & Larsen, 2011) and Keith Hol- equip epistemological statements with methodological
linshead (1999, 2009b), when vulnerability and viability tools, such ‘categorical styles’ can be known and
are ontological issues. Indeed, these are the two poles studied in three ways, according to Mannheim (1952):
of analysis that merit critical consideration. As the intrinsically or objectively (without investigating the
special issue in the Journal of Tourism Futures suggests, motivation of those who uphold them), extrinsically or
such bifurcated enunciations are biopolitical in nature, subjectively (through the ways they express/externalise
even though their ontological basis remains moral and them) and documentarily (through textual or third-
not dispassionate (if there is such a thing). Especially party accounts). Deleuze and Guattari (1988) as well as
tourism studies academics, who refute the primacy of Guattari (1989/2000) invite a blend between these cat-
economics in tourism development in the age of crises egories but emphasise the importance of the second
and extinction, understandably feel compelled to as a meta-field of investigation (the existential territory).
612 R. TZANELLI

Let us return now to the refrains in recent publications which keeps the world from changing, is to assume a
on crisis in/of tourism: in terms of temporality, their world- utopian stance and judge ideology on this basis. Assum-
views project one type of movement to the future but ing the position of an onlooker (what Mannheim called a
uphold at least two styles. When they adopt a critique ‘free-floating intellectual’ or ‘extrinsic researcher’) is
of biopolitics, the analyses move backwards first, to estab- pragmatically impossible. To move from Hollinshead &
lish genealogical accounts of inequalities; in terms of Vellah’s virtual subjectivisation (i.e. the making of the
interests, this arc is mostly anthropocentric and anchored tourist subject that ‘worldmakes’) to the pragmatic
on effects of fairness, rather than fully articulated justice. field of scholarly worldmaking, we may need to acknowl-
Within this refrain, another group of arguments does not edge a few inconvenient truths about our dominant
really attempt to ‘reset’ the world, only to show the state epistemic role in crisis management as a species. For
of human affairs at a particular moment in time. Such ana- this, a shift to what Anna Tsing calls ‘world-making’ is
lyses are prominent in the cognate field of hospitality useful. This involves the ways ‘projects’ emerge from
studies and have stronger connections to terrorism man- practical activities of making lives ‘in the shadow of
agement, whereas the more recent work on climate the Anthropocene’ (2015, pp. 21–22). Tsing’s conception
change and pandemics tends to revive the affective of world-making as a lay, practical activity, differs from
tropes of hope. Yet, when coupled with understandings Hollinshead’s (2009a) emphasis on the authorial role of
of resilience in blended scholarship-locality contexts, all the nation/tourist state but mediates Hollinshead and
these approaches fuse notions of preservation/conserva- Suleman’s (2018) thesis on the ways worldmaking is
tion of material and immaterial heritage (Kirshenblatt- instilled or normalised in everyday activities in tourism.
Gimblett, 1997) with the viability of futural forms of (post- However, taking a look inwards, reflecting on the ways
human or anthropocentric) life. As Kirshenblatt-Gimblett epistemic-academic communities think about such pro-
has explained, the ‘production of hereness’ in the jects leaves one with no outside. As much as Ricoeur’s
absence of the actuality of heritage ‘depends increasingly proposition forges an anti-ideological polemics
on virtualities’ (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, 1997, p. 169). The (against capitalism, state and corporate violence, ordin-
cybernetic project recedes in the background and is func- ary human insensitivity towards the other and so
tionalised (to remain ‘useful’ to future generations of thin- forth), one must not lose sight of a peculiar convergence
kers and doers of viable futures). in antithetical refrains.
Tourism analyses on climate change and pandemics Both ideological and utopian propositions concern-
oscillate between communicating a feeling that an end ing the future of the world (and of worlds of tourism)
approaches humanity (of environmental equilibriums, favour a gaze which is cast upon variations of otherness:
world peace or a pestilence-free earth, to stick to the natural environments, disadvantaged human popu-
three aforementioned dominant crises). The same or lations and failing industrial formations. The very
similar theses proffer ‘solutions’ to these disasters and nature of scholarship as a godly spectre over reality pro-
policies of risk minimisation, adopting a salvaging duces a meta-movement that takes place in one’s mind.
stance. However, policy-making in publications is not It is unnecessary to repeat the old observation that
where the true arc or meta-refrain rests: where an end especially critical theorists tend to assume the role of
is felt or pronounced, hope is resurrected among the epis- an infallible expert in the enunciation of problems that
temic communities that produce collections of critical affect the world at large. In any case, such critiques of cri-
special issues, monographs, and collective volumes (Tza- tique can also be reductive. In fact, it matters more to
nelli, 2021b). The catastrophist imaginary that forewords stress that (a) the primary antithetical binary of the
scholarly political commitment to a better world, free of tourist body versus tourist gaze or mind has been
prejudice, pollution and inequalities continues to be bio- matched with that of tourist performance/authenticity
political even when it pronounces its support of pro- versus contemplation/inauthenticity respectively and
environmental causes. It could be argued that even the (b) this scaffolding cannot be excised from problematic
emergence of environmental humanities as a field moralistic divisions between action and spectatorship
served the same purpose: under an allegorical pretence in crisis management. The scaffolding originates not in
to examine nature or the environment, it forms an episte- Foucault’s biopolitical thesis but the conditions of
mic basis of a community of interest. ‘total war’ and state violence discussed by Hannah
Arendt (Arendt, 1958).
In the age of climate catastrophe, terror and pan-
Instead of concluding: the worlds know no ‘End’
demics, action becomes fetishised in a variety of ways
French philosopher Paul Ricoeur (1986) once suggested that cannot neatly separate pro-environmental calls for
that the only way to escape the circularity of ideology, a return to ‘Mother Nature’ or earth from a Hobbesian
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 613

state of nature: we worked hard as a species to acquire imagine themselves as part of a ‘commons’ that can
all this technology to master an unfriendly planet, and induce the capitalist system’s destruction. This connects
here we are, wanting to bin it all in eco-friendly mani- institutional-tourist imaginaries of the future to the
festos. Unfortunately, the promise of holistic philos- utopian project of what Hardt and Negri (2004) call the
ophies underpinning post-humanist communitarianism ‘multitude’: a counter-hegemonic movement of Marxist
(i.e. we are part of a larger-than-us whole) may also overtones which can challenge capitalism’s deterritoria-
hide ecofascistic traps that recuperate total ideologies. lised forces of persuasion. This will be achieved through
Being eco-friendly can also be exclusionary and danger- an equally mobile counter-force sustaining local causes
ous in other words. Ecofascism in climate change in the face of relentless homogenisation. This adum-
tourism solutions can also reproduce what ecologists brates the affective nature of the article’s meta-refrain
call ‘Rapoport’s Rule’: less biodiverse environments as one of solidary com-passion: feeling-as-suffering
mostly in temperate climate zones, are (unjustly, appar- (páthos) and thus affectively being together in tough
ently) inhabited by species, such as humans and cock- times (see again Cheer et al., 2021 on ‘resilience’). It is
roaches, which can survive in other zones too, thus fair to note that this type of worldmaking belongs to
crowding and eliminating other local species (Fuller, the domain of the ‘not yet’ possible, so it offers less in
2006, pp. 184–135). This is an unfortunate reading of terms of concrete (‘viable’) futural planning. However,
natural economy as a disturbed equilibrium between it addresses a crucial vulnerability in academic scholar-
species and individuals, which turns posthuman collab- ship on tourism futures, which is generated by the
orations into guilt games targeting particular groups, very origins of tourism in global economic systems. Its
usually from the middle social strata. Such groups revising potentiality connects to the very production of
often act in tourism networks as supporters of various resurgent sympathetic communities that feel (Ahmed,
local causes, promoting variations of tourism amenable 2004). Regardless of its vision of creating a better life
to development without always combating inequality for all sentient beings on earth, this meta-refrain’s enun-
(e.g. volunteer tourism – Mostafanezhad, 2016). ciative channels continue to be human.
It is worth concluding with a few concise observations
on the meta-refrain these three crises in tourism sustain
Disclosure statement
in academic circles – their unitary ‘worldmaking arc’, so
to speak. First, the scholarship that enunciates their No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
aims presents an ambivalent attitude towards globalisa-
tion: on the one hand, it opposes the inequalities it gen-
Notes on contributor
erates and thus its spirit, which is that of unrestrained
capitalist development. On the other, it supports Rodanthi Tzanelli is an Associate Professor of Cultural Soci-
tourism, which is one of its offshoots. It is important to ology and Director of the Mobilities Area in the Bauman Insti-
tute, University of Leeds, UK. She is a social and cultural theorist
stress for example how Irina Ateljevic’s (2009, 2013, of mobility (tourism, technology, social and academic move-
2020) mobilisation of Enrique Dussel’s liberation theol- ments) with particular reference to the representational con-
ogy refuses to turn tourism into an ‘criminal suspect’ in texts of contemporary crises such as climate change,
discourses of development. Her strategy, as is the case consumption and capitalism. She is the author of numerous
with others, is pragmatic: it aspires to subvert its critical interventions, research articles and chapters, as well
as 15 monographs.
system from within, by handing over its operative struc-
tures to those it initially harmed. In short, critical tour-
ism’s de-theologised pragmatics of ‘thinking small’ and ORCID
sustainably do not fully operate outside development
Rodanthi Tzanelli http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5765-9856
but tend to favour communitarian models that support
diversity.
The second aspect of this ambivalence towards glo- References
balisation is rooted in the nature of the movement
such scholarship generates, which develops out of
Individual references
many ‘anarchic’ intellectual enclaves with quite Agarwal, S., Page, S., & Mawby, R. (2021). Tourist security, ter-
different agendas. Although their worldmaking enunci- rorism risk management and tourist safety. Annals of
Tourism Research, 89, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ations may project such disparate propositions to
annals.2021.103207
make better futures in tourism, with the exception of Ahmed, S. (2004). Cultural politics of emotion. Routledge.
the integrationist futurism of traditional ‘business as Arendt, H. (1958) The human condition. University of Chicago
usual’ tourism economics theorists, all other enclaves Press.
614 R. TZANELLI

Ateljevic, I. (2009). Transmodernity – remaking our (tourism) Grimwood, B. S. R., Caton, K., & Cooke, L. (2018). New moral
world? In J. Tribe (Ed.), Philosophical issues in tourism (pp. natures in tourism. Routledge.
278–300). Elsevier. Guattari, F. (1989/2000). The three ecologies. Bloomsbury.
Ateljevic, I. (2013). Transmodernity: Integrating perspectives on Guattari, F. (1992/1995). Chaosmosis: An ethico-aesthetic para-
societal evolution. Futures, 47(March), 38–48. https://doi. digm. Indiana University Press.
org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.01.002 Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2004). Multitude: War and democracy in
Ateljevic, I. (2020). Transforming the (tourism) world for good the age of empire. Penguin.
and (re)generating the potential ‘new normal’. Tourism Higgins-Desbiolles, F., Carnicelli, S., Krolikowski, C., Wijesinghe,
Geographies, 22(3), 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/ G., & Boluk, K. (2019). Degrowing tourism: Rethinking
14616688.2020.1759134 tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27(12), 1926–1944.
Beck, U. (2006). Living in the world risk society. Economy and Society, https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2019.1601732
35(3), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140600844902 Hollinshead, K. (1999). Surveillance of the worlds of tourism:
Bertelsen, L., & Murphie, A. (2010). An ethics of everyday Foucault and the eye-of-power. Tourism Management, 20
infinities and powers: Felix Guattari on affect and the (1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(98)00090-9
refrain. In M. Gregg & G. J. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect Hollinshead, K. (2009a). ‘Tourism state’ cultural production: The
theory reader (pp. 138–160). Duke University Press. re-making of Nova Scotia. Tourism Geographies, 11(4), 526–
Brouder, P. (2020). Reset redux: Possible evolutionary pathways 545. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616680903262737
towards the transformation of tourism in a COVID-19 world. Hollinshead, K. (2009b). The “worldmaking” prodigy of tourism:
Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 484–490. https://doi.org/10. The reach and power of tourism in the dynamics of change
1080/14616688.2020.1760928 and transformation. Tourism Analysis, 14(1), 139–152.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1988). A thousand plateaus: https://doi.org/10.3727/108354209788970162
Capitalism and schizophrenia. Athlone. Hollinshead, K., & Suleman, R. (2018). The everyday instillations
Dory, D. (2021). Tourism and international terrorism: A carto- of worldmaking: New vistas of understanding on the
graphic approach. Via, 19, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.4000/ declarative reach of tourism. Tourism Analysis, 23(2), 201–
viatourism.7243. 213. https://doi.org/10.3727/108354218X15210313504553
Edensor, T. (2000). Staging tourism: Tourists and performers. Hollinshead, K., & Vellah, A. B. (2020). Dreaming forward:
Annals of Tourism Research, 27(2), 322–344. https://doi.org/ Postidentity and the generative thresholds of tourism.
10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00082-1 Journal of Geographical Research, 3(4), 8–21. https://doi.
Edensor, T. (2001a). Performing tourism, staging tourism: org/10.30564/jgr.v3i4.2299
(Re)producing tourist pace and practice. Tourist Studies, 1 Houge Mackenzie, S., & Goodnow, J. (2020). Adventure in the
(1), 59–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879760100100104 age of COVID-19: Embracing microadventures and locavism
Edensor, T. (2001b). Walking the British countryside: Reflexivity, in a post-pandemic world. Leisure Sciences, 43(1-2), 62–69.
embodied practices and ways to escape. In P. MacNaughten https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2020.1773984
& J. Urry (Eds.), Bodies of nature (pp. 81–106). SAGE. Ibn-Mohammed, T., Mustapha, K. B., Godsell, J., Adamu, Z.,
Fennell, D. A. (2021). Technology and the sustainable tourist in Babatunde, K. A., Akintade, D. D., Acquaye, A., Fujii, H.,
the new age of disruption. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29 Ndiaye, M. M., Yamoah, F. A., & Koh, S. C. L. (2021). A critical
(5), 767–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1769639 analysis of the impacts of COVID-19 on the global economy
Fullagar, S., Wilson, E., & Markwell, K. (2012). Starting slow: Slow and ecosystems and opportunities for circular economy
mobilities and experiences. In S. Fullagar, K. Markwell, & E. strategies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 164
Wilson (Eds.), Slow tourism: Experiences and mobilities (pp. (105169), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105169.
1–11). Channel View. Jennings, G. R. (2012). Methodologies and methods. In T. Jamal
Fuller, S. (2006). The new sociological imagination. SAGE. & M. Robinson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of tourism studies
Fuller, S. (2011). Humanity 2.0. Palgrave Macmillan. (pp. 672–692). SAGE.
Fuller, S. (2012). The art of being human: A project for general Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. (1997). Destination culture. University
philosophy of science. Journal for General Philosophy of of California Press.
Science, 43(1), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838- Korstanje, M. E. (2018a). The mobilities paradox: A critical analy-
012-9181-5 sis. Edward Elgar.
Germann Molz, J., & Buda, D.-M. (2022). Attuning to affect and Korstanje, M. E. (2018b). Terrorism, tourism and the end of hos-
emotion in tourism studies. Tourism Geographies, 24(2-3), pitality in the west. Springer.
187–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2021.2012714 Korstanje, M. E., & Clayton, A. (2012). Tourism and terrorism:
Gössling, S. (2021). Tourism, technology and ICT: A critical Conflicts and commonalities. Worldwide Hospitality and
review of affordances and concessions. Journal of Tourism Themes, 4(1), 8–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/
Sustainable Tourism, 29(5), 733–750. https://doi.org/10. 17554211211198552
1080/09669582.2021.1873353 Korstanje, M. E., & Séraphin, H. (2020). Tourism, terrorism and
Gössling, S., Scott, D., & Hall, M. C. (2021). Pandemics, tourism security. Emerald.
and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19. Korstanje, M. E., Skoll, G., & Timmermann, F. (2014). Terrorism,
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/ tourism and worker unions: The disciplinary boundaries of
10.1080/09669582.2020.1758708 fear. International Journal of Religious Tourism and
Gretzel, U., Fuchs, M., & Baggio, R. (2020). E-Tourism beyond Pilgrimage, 2(1), https://doi.org/10.21427/D7HQ6C. https://
COVID-19: A call for transformative research. Information arrow.tudublin.ie/ijrtp/vol2/iss1/4.
Technology & Tourism, 22(2), 187–203. https://doi.org/10. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. University
1007/s40558-020-00181-3 of Chicago Press.
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 615

Kumm, B., Berbary, L., & Grimwood, B. S. R. (2019). For those to Swain, M. (2009). The cosmopolitan hope of tourism: Critical
come: An introduction to why posthumanism matters. action and worldmaking vistas. Tourism Geographies, 11(4),
Leisure Sciences, 41(5), 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 505–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616680903262695
01490400.2019.1628677 Tribe, J. (2001). Research paradigms and the tourism curricu-
Lapointe, D., Sarrasin, B., & Lagueux, J. (2020). Management, lum. Journal of Travel Research, 39(4), 442–448. https://doi.
biopolitics and foresight: What looks for the future of the org/10.1177/004728750103900411
world? Teoros, 39(3), https://doi.org/10.7202/1075019ar. Tsing, A. (2015). The mushroom at the end of the world: On the
http://journals.openedition.org/teoros/8407. possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton University Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and Tzanelli, R. (2011). Cosmopolitan memory in Europe’s ‘back-
engineers through society. Open University Press. waters: Rethinking civility. Routledge.
Levy, D. L., & Spicer, A. (2013). Contested imaginaries and Tzanelli, R. (2021a). Cultural (im)mobilities and the Virocene:
the cultural political economy of climate change. Mutating the crisis. Edward Elgar.
Organization, 20(5), 659–678. https://doi.org/10.1177/135 Tzanelli, R. (2021b). “Post-viral tourism’s antagonistic tourist
0508413489816 imaginaries”. Journal of Tourism Futures, 7(3), 377–389.
Lew, A. A., Cheer, J. M., Brouder, P., & Mostafanezhad, M. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-07-2020-0105
Global tourism and COVID-19. Routledge. Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gaze (1st ed.). SAGE.
Lutz, B. J., & Lutz, J. M. (2020). Terrorism and tourism in the Urry, J. (2016). What is the future? Polity.
Caribbean: A regional analysis. Behavioral Sciences of Urry, J., & Larsen, J. (2011). The tourist gaze 3.0. SAGE.
Terrorism and Political Aggression, 12(1), 55–71. https://doi.
org/10.1080/19434472.2018.1518337
Mannheim, K. (1936). Ideology and utopia: An introduction to
the sociology of knowledge. Harvest Book/Harcourt Inc.
Special issues
Mannheim, K. (1952). Essays on the sociology of knowledge.
Routledge and Kegan Paul. Cheer, J.M., Lapointe, D., Mostafanezhad, M. & Jamal, T. (Eds.)
Massumi, B. (2002). Parables of the virtual: Movement, affect, (2021) Tourism in crisis: global threats to sustainable
sensation. Duke University Press. tourism futures. Journal of Tourism Futures, 7(3). https://
Mostafanezhad, M. (2016). Volunteer tourism: Popular humani- www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/2055-5911/vol/
tarianism in neoliberal times. Routledge. 7/iss/3
Munar, A. M., & Jamal, T. (2016). What are paradigms for? In A. Coca-Stefaniak, A. & A.M. Morrison (Eds.) (2018). ‘City tourism
M. Munar & T. Jamal (Eds.), Tourism research paradigms (pp. destinations and terrorism’. International Journal of
1–16). Emerald. Tourism Cities, 4(4). https://www.emerald.com/insight/
Okafor, L. E., Khalid, U., & Burzynska, K. (2022). Does the publication/issn/2056-5607/vol/4/iss/4
level of a country’s resilience moderate the link Han, H. (Ed.) (2021). ‘Sustainability and consumer behavior’.
between the tourism industry and the economic policy Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(7). https://www.
response to the COVID-19 pandemic? Current Issues in tandfonline.com/toc/rsus20/29/7
Tourism, 25(2), 303–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500. Korstanje, M.E. (Ed.) (2014). ‘Tourism and terrorism’.
2021.1956441 International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage, 2
Ricoeur, P. (1986). Lectures on ideology and utopia. Columbia (1). https://arrow.tudublin.ie/ijrtp/vol2/iss1/
University Press. Lew, A., Cheer, J., Brouder, P. Teoh, S., Balslev Clausen, H., Hall,
Rosenberger, R., & Verbeek, P.-P. (2015). A field guide to post- M., Haywood, M., Higgins-Desbiolles, F., Lapointe, D.,
phenomenology. In R. Rosenberger & P. P. Verbeek (Eds.), Mostafanezhad, M., Mei Pung, J. & Salazar, N. (Eds.) (2020).
Postphenomenological investigations (pp. 9–41). Books. Visions of travel and tourism after the global COVID-19
Scheyvens, R., & van der Watt, H. (2021). Tourism, empower- transformation of 2020. Tourism Geographies, 22(3). https://
ment and sustainable development: A new framework for www.tandfonline.com/toc/rtxg20/22/3
analysis. Sustainability, 13(22), 12606. https://doi.org/10. Page, S. (Ed.) (2021). ‘Compilation of Covid-19 and tourism
3390/su132212606 papers’. Tourism Management, https://www.sciencedirect.
Scott, D., Hall, C. M., & Gössling, S. (2012). Tourism and climate com/journal/tourism-management/special-issue/
change: Impacts, adaptation and mitigation. Routledge. 10LQNSMGXDN
Sheller, M. (2009). Infrastructures of the imagined island: Ryu, K. (Ed.) (2021). ’Impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the
Software, mobilities and the architecture of Caribbean para- hospitality and tourism industry’. Sustainability, 13. https://
dise. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 41(6), www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/special_issues/
1386–1403. https://doi.org/10.1068/a41248 tourism_sus
Sheller, M. (2020). Island futures: Caribbean survival in the Walters, G. & McKercher, B. (Eds.) (2021). Where to from here?
Anthropocene. Duke University Press. COVID 19 and the future of tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of
Stern, D. N. (2004). The present moment in psychotherapy and Tourism Research, 26(11). https://www.tandfonline.com/
everyday life. W.W. Norton & Co. toc/rapt20/26/11