The Economic Geography of the Tourist Industry

A Supply-Side Analysis

Keith G. Debbage, Dimitri Ioannides

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 1998
• Topic: Business
• eBook ISBN:
  9781134712496
• Subtopic: Development Economics
• Index: Business

The Economic Geography of the Tourist Industry bridges the gap between tourism research and economic geography by bringing together leading academics in geography, planning and tourism. The authors explain tourism's definitions and examine whether tourism can be categorized as an industry. They provide detailed analyses of key sectors, such as tour

1
INTRODUCTION: EXPLORING THE ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY AND TOURISM NEXUS

Dimitri Ioannides and Keith G.Debbage

The geographic study of tourism requires a more rigorous core of theory in order to conceptualize fully its role in capitalist accumulation, its economic dynamics, and its role in creating the materiality and social meaning of places…. Geographers conducting research on tourism have the potential to integrate their topic into the forefront of contemporary debates in the discipline.

(S.Britton 1991:452)

Background

In the late twentieth century the pursuit of leisure has become an essential ingredient of modern consumer culture (Featherstone 1991). Nowadays, particularly in western societies, people regard leisure and recreation as their right, an avenue of escapism from the monotonous routine of everyday life on the job. Travel and tourism are key representations of the growing dichotomy between work and leisure. Becoming a tourist allows a person to move temporarily away from the usual place of residence and visit destinations offering views and experiences which do not feature within their ordinary everyday lives. These views and experiences, which Urry (1988) has dubbed ‘the tourist gaze’, are sought predominantly for the purpose of deriving pleasure. Even business travelers, who in certain destinations may represent a significant proportion of all tourists, commonly participate in various leisure and recreation-oriented activities during their trips (Shaw and Williams 1994).

In the past, the experiential aspects associated with leisure-based activities such as travel and tourism have led a number of observers from a variety of disciplines to dismiss the study of leisure and tourism as frivolous, especially when compared to seemingly more ‘important’ academic research on such matters as manufacturing and related issues (Blank 1989; R.Britton 1978; Hall 1994). Krippendorf appropriately mentions that most people do not regard leisure and tourism-related actions as ‘serious’ since these cannot be equated to work, ‘and only work can be serious’ (1987:ix).

Fortunately it appears that the tide is gradually changing, as in recent years, more and more social scientists have embraced the study of travel and tourism. To an extent, this rising interest in tourism reflects the recognition that leisure- related activities are indeed important functions within modern societies and that their consumption ‘cannot be separated from the social relations in which they are embedded’ (Urry 1995:129). Researchers have begun to realize, for example, that through studying tourism they can gain a better grasp on issues relating to economic or societal restructuring. Tourism and leisure are related to broader economic and societal issues including the globalization of culture, the commodification of place, and territorial competition (Featherstone 1991; Harvey 1989a; Shaw and Williams 1994). Within this realm, tourism itself is now commonly regarded as part of the nascent ‘culture industry’ and, as such, is an experience which can be bought and sold as a commodity just like other household recreation-oriented products (e.g. televisions, stereos, books, magazines, etc.). Similar to other consumer goods, travel and tourism activities are capitalistically organized, involving the production of both intangible/experiential, but also tangible, goods and services.

Importantly, certain types of travel and tourism activities (e.g. hotels and catering establishments) cannot be considered purely consumer services since they also function as producer or support services (Daniels 1993). For example, hotels not only meet consumer-based or final demand through their experiential products, but they also satisfy intermediate demand (e.g. through information exchange and the development of business contacts) since they also supply other businesses and government institutions with convention facilities which in turn can deliver additional service-related outputs. A clear example of the producer service component of tourism is the rapidly growing business travel sector (Bull and Church 1994), much of which has little to do with either pleasure or leisure.

According to S.Britton (1991:453–54), there now exists a complex ensemble of ‘enterprises, industries, markets, state agencies’—a travel and tourism production system—whose overriding aim is to market not just the means to an end, but the end itself, the travel experience (see also Urry 1995). The sheer volume of this production system, which according to numerous sources now forms the world’s largest industrial complex (Lundberg et al. 1995), is a particularly compelling rationale for the growing academic interest in travel and tourism. The travel and tourism sector now employs almost 7 per cent of the global workforce and accounts for just over 6 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) world-wide (Apostolopoulos et al. 1996; C. M.Hall 1994; Theobald 1994). In a variety of settings, from remote villages in less developed countries to major metropolitan regions in advanced regions, policymakers enthusiastically pursue the development of tourist-oriented facilities (e.g. airports, convention centers, sports stadia, aquaria, museums) in the hope of attracting foreign exchange and, in turn, generating economic growth, creating jobs, and eventually diversifying the economy. Even though tourism has been subjected to increasing criticism in recent years, due to the environmental and sociocultural costs it imposes on host societies and the realization that it is not as ‘clean’ an industry as once thought, to a major extent the attitude of most policymakers towards this sector has remained overwhelmingly favorable (Judd 1995).

Given the sector’s magnitude and high visibility in so many localities around the globe, it is hardly surprising that a growing number of social scientists have now jumped on the bandwagon of tourism-related research. In the past two decades alone, there has been an explosion of travel and tourism-related literature in the form of books, journal articles, and monographs. Anthropologists (V.Smith 1977), economists (Gray 1970; Lundberg et al. 1995), geographers (R.Britton 1978; S.Britton 1991; Butler 1980; Shaw and Williams 1994), sociologists (Cohen 1995; Lanfant 1993; Urry 1990), and even political scientists (C.M.Hall 1994; Judd 1995; Richter 1989) and urban planners (Gunn 1994; Inskeep 1988) have explored tourism within their respective disciplines, and their writings have certainly enriched our understanding of the sector.

Geographic research in travel and tourism

In recent years, geographers have been particularly active in tourism research. Borrowing viewpoints from other disciplines and integrating these with their own spatial perspective, geographers have actively explored and sought to interpret a diversity of research problems relating to travel and tourism. Many geographic texts on tourism, leisure, and recreation devote at least some attention to the definitional complexities related to the travel sector, and tourists themselves. Like most other social scientists, geographers are intrigued by tourism’s economic, sociocultural, and environmental impacts in a variety of settings (R.Britton 1978; Mathieson and Wall 1982; Pearce 1989 and 1995; Zurick 1992). They have paid special attention to tourism’s land-use implications in receiving areas, examining ways by which the sector can be developed in order to maximize economic returns while minimizing negative cultural or environmental externalities (Pearce 1995; Wilkinson 1989). Within this context, studies have explored the issues of tourism carrying capacities and sustainable tourism development (Butler 1980; Williams and Gill 1994). There has also been research on the patterns of tourist flows and the spatial proclivities of tourism-related activities (Pearce 1995; Williams and Zelinsky 1970). Furthermore, a substantial body of geographic literature relates to the dynamics of tourism evolution in destination areas (Butler 1980; Christaller 1963; Debbage 1990; Haywood 1986; Ioannides 1992; Miossec 1977).

Despite the surge of geographic interest in tourism, a number of critics have lamented the descriptive nature of most studies in the discipline. As S.Britton (1991) asserts, the mainstream geography journals (e.g. Area, Economic Geography, Progress in Human Geography, Urban Geography) have generally ignored much of this body of tourism research, precisely because of its ‘narrow scope and shallow theoretical base’ (475). Of course this dearth of rigorous theory characterizes, albeit to varying degrees, tourism research in much of the social sciences and has been a major hurdle in terms of advancing ‘our understanding of the processes contributing to tourism (i.e. its growth, development, operation, and management) and the way it functions in different environments’ (Page 1995:3). Page explains that the lack of a solid conceptual framework largely relates to the way that tourism research has evolved as a subdiscipline of a variety of other disciplines (e.g. economics, sociology), meaning it is missing the theoretical cohesiveness normally associated with most major research fields in the social sciences.

A particular gap in the literature relates to the supply-side of tourism, a peculiar phenomenon when considering the industry’s apparent magnitude and importance in numerous localities (S.Britton 1991; Ioannides 1995; Sinclair 1991). True, a number of studies examine the organizational and institutional aspects of the tourism sector (Burkart and Medlik 1981; Gee et al. 1989; Mill and Morrison 1985; Pearce 1989; Williams and Shaw 1988) yet, once more, these are largely descriptive and have been developed outside a rigorous theoretical framework. For example, the political economy perspective that has characterized the recent work of many regional economists and geographers is largely absent in examinations of the travel and tourism sector (though see S.Britton 1991; Shaw and Williams 1994).

The silence of economic geographers

It is no secret that most geographers who engage in locational studies of economic activity have historically focused disproportionately on manufacturing activities. Fortunately, it now seems that this myopic vision of the space economy has begun to abate somewhat given recent transformations in the production system and the structural changes in the production of goods and services. Thus, since the mid-1980s there has been a major revolution in economic geography, as an increasing number of academics have begun paying attention to the spatial patterns of the rapidly expanding service sector (Christopherson 1993; Coffey and Bailly 1992; Daniels 1993; Dunham 1997; Malmberg 1994; Townsend 1991; Urry 1987).

Nevertheless, despite the surge of interest in services, most studies concentrate heavily on the producer services whereas consumer services (perhaps with the exception of retailing) have been neglected. Tourism and leisure-related services have aroused only sporadic interest in the geography of production (Shaw and Williams 1994) reflecting their present status as the ‘poor cousin’ or ‘Cinderella’ of services (Ioannides 1995:58). A cursory glance at the table of contents of most mainstream economic geography texts and periodicals reveals almost no reference to tourism and travel-related services (Berry et al. 1993; de Souza and Stutz 1994; Chapman and Walker 1991). The few books mentioning travel and/or tourism do so as an afterthought (Hartshorn and Alexander 1988; Healy and Ilbery 1990), and lack any theoretical discussion on the sector’s spatial proclivities or the dynamics of its labor markets. Importantly, a number of service-oriented texts also overlook the role of consumer services like tourism. For instance, while Daniels (1993) briefly examines the British airline sector within the overall scope of tradable producer services, he does not indicate the broader interconnections of this sector with the much larger tourism production system. Moreover, though certain academics devote considerable attention to the role of services in the restructuring of cities, they surprisingly omit any discussion of tourism’s significance as a job and income generator for metropolitan economies (Stanback and Noyelle 1982). Finally, even though in recent years, an increasing number of economic geographers have advocated a more comprehensive ‘services-informed’ research agenda for producer, consumer and public-sector oriented services (Dunham 1997; Townsend 1991), there have been no such holistic approaches relating to the study of tourism.

Reasons behind the silence

Economic geographers have traditionally shunned the study of tourism because, like many other academics, they regard it and, for that matter, most consumer services as subordinate to more ‘acceptable’ or ‘serious’ activities like manufacturing or producer services (R.Britton 1978; Pearce 1989). In the United States, such an attitude most likely reflects allegiance to the nineteenth- century Protestant work ethic which stresses ‘tangible, physical construction and production’ (Blank 1989:2). Certain authors have even criticized the physical regeneration of localities for the consumption of tourism as an affront to the hard, concrete labor of yesteryear (Boyer 1992). Such attitudes, unfortunately, mirror the stigma tourism has to bear as an activity traditionally associated with pleasure. This is despite growing recognition that certain components of the travel and tourism sector (e.g. business travel) can only tangentially be associated with pleasure-related activities or traditional consumer-based services.

It is, however, not altogether surprising that such misconceptions hound tourism research within the sphere of economic geography. After all, academics generally have overriding reservations concerning the importance ‘of services in local economic development’ (Townsend 1991:309). A prevailing perception is that sectors such as manufacturing or producer services are the foundation of wealth creation in any community whereas consumer services such as tourism, which often depend on unskilled, highly feminized, low-wage, seasonal and/or part-time labor, are merely peripheral actors. Moreover, the tourism sector’s poor image derives from accusations that it makes limited use of technologies and repeatedly demonstrates low productivity levels. A common charge is that the sector offers few opportunities for tax-base expansion and ‘because wages are minimal and turnover is high, it is likely that workers will have trouble supporting their families and will require welfare services from the government’ (Judd 1988: 393).

As is often discussed throughout this text, a parallel reason for tourism’s subservient role compared to other economic activities, like manufacturing and producer services, derives from its ‘invisible condition’. As Ashworth argues, ‘a tourism industry does not exist in the same institutional sense as does the motor car industry’ (1992:4). Rather ‘the industry itself is diverse and rambling—sleeping bag manufacturers and art museums claim membership in it’ (R.Britton 1978:17). The tourism industry is multifaceted comprising the aggregate of goods and services produced by different economic sectors, such as lodging, transportation, retailing, or recreation facilities. Thus, it is exceedingly hard for researchers to estimate with any degree of accuracy the sector’s magnitude or significance in terms, for example, of generated revenues or employment.

Tourism’s status as an industry remains a hotly debated issue. Some analysts argue that like any other industry there is a need to view tourism as a totally industrialized sector, that is from a supply-side perspective. This approach means tourism has to be defined in terms of the goods and services it produces (Smith 1988). Still, others maintain that the industrial approach is shortsighted since only a portion of the sector is industrialized (G.Hughes 1991). When tourists visit a destination they do not depend entirely on so-called tourism industries (e.g. accommodation, tour guiding services) but also commonly participate in ‘non-market’ activities (e.g. independent sightseeing, photography, hiking) (Leiper 1990a:603).

Moreover, as Leiper argues, a considerable proportion of a locality’s workforce can exist regardless of tourism (e.g. a restaurant or a gift shop) and may directly or indirectly cater to tourist needs. To further complicate matters, a number of public/quasi public organizations (e.g. national tourism administrations, visitors’ bureaux, non-profit groups) engage in the business of tourism. Thus, beyond the collection of private-sector industries and other commercial activities, the production and consumption of tourism experiences also depend on public agencies, host communities, and individuals. It is precisely this ‘non-industrialized’ portion of tourism that contributes to the sector’s ‘poor reputation in the eyes of policy analysts, government officials, economic analysts and industry leaders not involved in tourism’ (S.Smith 1988:182).

The economic geography of tourism: towards a specialist approach

Unfortunately, the weak level of theorization associated with most investigations relating to tourism’s supply-side means that we have been unable to strengthen our understanding of the sector’s workings and resulting socioeconomic actions. For instance, there is a pressing need to obtain answers to such questions as: What are the dynamics of tourism’s labor markets? What is the role of entrepreneurship in the tourism industry? How does the diffusion of information technologies influence the travel sector? What are the effects of spatial and temporal contingencies on travel-related enterprises? Why do certain localities benefit more than others from tourism? How do the sector’s various actors and stakeholders interact to promote destinations and what is the role of state institutions in this process? How do alleged economic or societal changes, particularly the emergence of post-modernism and the advent of postFordist modes of production and consumption, play out in tourism? Is Scott (1993) correct when he points out that tourist areas feature characteristics normally identified in flexible production agglomerations?

To begin answering these questions, there is a strong need to broaden the scope of geographic research in tourism. This can be achieved not only by further legitimizing tourism and recreation research as a geographic subdiscipline in its own right, but also by embracing this study area within a number of other sub-disciplines within geography. For example, various branches of geography can benefit from incorporating travel and tourism studies within their realm. As R.Britton appropriately argued almost two decades ago

Tourism is a phenomenon variably distributed in space (and time), and it can thus be approached from a variety of geographical branches. The locations of markets and destinations, and the flow of people, capital, goods, and ideas are at the core of tourism. It influences the form, use, and protection of the landscape. Cultural values such as changing tastes in accommodation transform rural and urban landscapes.. The obvious impact of tourism on the physical environment. call for attention by physical geographers..

(R.Britton 1979:278)

Tourism also belongs to the domain of a variety of other geographic subdisciplines such as cultural, transportation, urban, and political geography. Referring to the study of urban tourism, for example, Ashworth (1992) and Page (1995) have indicated the need for both theoretical and empirical approache...

Table of contents

• COVER PAGE
• TITLE PAGE
• COPYRIGHT PAGE
• ILLUSTRATIONS
• TABLES
• NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
• FOREWORD
• PREFACE
• 1: INTRODUCTION: EXPLORING THE ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY AND TOURISM NEXUS
• PART A: CONCEPTUAL AND DEFINITIONAL ISSUES: BARRIERS TO THEORY
• PART B: THE DEMAND-SIDE
• PART C: NEO-FORDISM AND FLEXIBILITY: A SECTORAL APPROACH
• PART D: GLOBAL-LOCAL NEXUS: PLACE COMMODIFICATION, ENTREPRENEURSHIP, AND LABOR
• PART E: CYCLES AND INNOVATIONS
• PART F: SYNTHESIS AND NEW DIRECTIONS
• BIBLIOGRAPHY