TourNord is happy to announce that the University of the Faroe Islands will be joining us!
The University of the Faroe Islands (UFI) is the primary higher education and research institution in the Faroe Islands, the nation’s only university and its foremost knowledge centre. It undertakes research and research-based teaching, providing for synergy between research and teaching, to serve the evolving needs and priorities of the Faroes and their wider region.
The University, which plays a vital role in Faroese society, currently has some 100 academic staff (full-time equivalents), some 60 staff in support and service positions, and around 1,000 students. The University’s Strategic Plan 2020-2024 provides a fresh statement of the University´s mission, together with a vision of a well-integrated, modern, professional university, working in partnership and in collaboration, to serve the evolving needs of the Faroe Islands and the wider region.
The Faroe Islands has also become a unique country (and first mover) in innovative approaches to a more sustainable and responsible form of tourism. We look forward to learning from them on how we can continuously improve tourism education in the Nordics and Baltics!
TouNord is now represented in Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, Norway, Finland Greenland, Lithuania, Poland and the Faroe Islands by 11 different institutions.
We are so very happy to announce that TourNord is adding yet another exciting partner to our network! A big, warm welcome to the Koszalin University of Technology!
The Koszalin University of Technology (KUT) has several fantastic tourism programs, and already has great experience working with several of our TourNord members. We are certain that KUT will provide unique and valuable insights into how we can drive forward TourNord and its goals on improving tourism education in the Nordics and Baltics!
Koszalin University of Technology (KUT), is a public technical university located in Koszalin, Poland. At present, it educates over nine thousand students in twenty-eight modern fields of study such as technical, economics, humanities and arts majors.
To its scientific staff, KUT offers the opportunity to work in laboratories equipped with the most up-to-date facilities, thus enabling the carrying out of research in the most advanced areas of scientific endeavour, and for its students it provides lines of study and specialisations which meet the wide-ranging demands of the 21st century, in particular in the spheres of applied science, information technology and communications.
We would like to give a warm welcome to our newest TourNord partner, the University of Gdańsk! We look forward to cooperating on tourism education and research, with particular focus on the Nordics and Baltics!
The University of Gdańsk is a large, multidisciplinary university and is increasingly involved in the tourism and hospitality sector. We are confident that their knowledge and experience will help strengthen the TourNord network! A bit of information about the university can be found below.
The University of Gdańsk
The University of Gdańsk (UG), located in Gdańsk (a city in northern Poland with over a thousand years of history) is at present the largest university in the Pomeranian region and has indisputable influence on the development of modern Poland, science and higher education. UG has eleven faculties with over 25 thousand students, doctoral students and post-graduates enrolled in such fields of study as Biology, Biotechnology, Chemistry, Oceanography, Quantum Physics, Pedagogy, Psychology, Law, Sociology, Spatial Management and Economic Sciences. The University remains faithful to its original 1970 motto – In mari via tua (The sea is your way), and its’ maritime image is reflected in many fields of study, specialities and research connected with the sea and in particular with the Baltic coast. The University is a valuable research centre devoted to sustainable development with educational programmes and research projects related to this important challenge. University of Gdańsk cooperates closely with the business sector in terms of education and scientific innovation.
Icelandic Tourism Research Centre (Rannsóknamiðstöð ferðamála):
The Icelandic Tourism Research Centre (ITRC) is a cooperative project between three universities: the University of Akureyri (UNAK), the University of Iceland (UI), and Hólar University (HU). The objectives of the centre are: to promote tourism research in Iceland, facilitate cooperation in Icelandic higher education institutes in the field of tourism studies, strengthening ties between academic work and industry, and to increase knowledge on tourism through domestic and international collaboration. The ITRC has participated in several multinational projects, e.g. funded by the EU Northern Periphery and Arctic Programme.
Lithuania Business University of Applied Sciences (Lietuvos verslo Kolegija):
LBUAS is a Lithuanian higher education and research institution located in the Lithuanian port city of Klaipeda with a branch in Vilnius. The institution conducts professional bachelor’s studies in five directions: management, tourism, economy, law, and technology. Also, together with social partners and scientific institutions, it implements national and international scientific-applied research, based on which the Department of Scientific-Applied Research is founded.
A quick update for planned TourNord network meetings!
We will be meeting for our third network meeting in Bergen, Norway on the 6th and 7th of March, 2023! The Western Norway University of Applied Sciences (Høgskulen på Vestlandet) will be hosting. The theme of the 3rd network meeting is about innovative and resilient Nordic Tourism! We look forward to meeting everyone there!
The 4th network meeting will be taking place in August 2023 (dates TBD) in Nuuk, Greenland! The University of Greenland (Ilisimatusarfik) will be hosting. The theme of the 4th network meeting will be about sustainable tourism and how to prepare for a greener future for our students!
And to finish with a little teaser….we have some new members joining us shortly! 🙂
Greenland is not only the largest island in the world, it is also the most sparsely populated country. Today more than 50% of the total population of 56000 live in the five municipal centers of Nuuk, Sisimiut, Ilulissat, Aasiat and Qaqortoq; the capital, Nuuk, has 19000 people. The Greenlandic economy is primarily based on fishing and fish processing, but there is increasing emphasis on developing industry (trade, construction, services), mining for e.g., gold, and rare earth elements and not the least tourism. Although still in its infancy, tourism grew slowly over the past few decades, save for a downturn during the Covid-19 pandemic.
A minor indication of tourism development in Greenland can be seen in Table 1, which includes national and international stays:
The Arctic in general has attracted great tourist interest, but destinations are unevenly distributed. The major tourist destination of the North, Iceland, had 4,5 million foreign overnight hotels stays in 2018, and 9 million overnight stays in all accommodations land and Greenland (Icelandic Tourist Board, 2019). Greenland is not Iceland and should not be, but the contrast between Greenland and Iceland suggests some possibilities for Greenland (Jóhannesson et.al. 2022).
Tourism in Southern Greenland
South Greenland is Greenland’s smallest municipality in terms of area and population. Today there are about 6700 inhabitants in the region, which is somewhat larger than Denmark, with four smaller towns (Narsassuaq, Narsaq, Qaqortoq and Nanortalik) and 11 settlements. There is a complicated geography, with no roads between towns and villages; the sea is the “highway”, with government providing some aircraft and helicopter connections.
In 2009, the three municipalities in the southern region, Nanortalik, Narsaq and Qaqortoq, were merged into Kommune Kujalleq, with Qaqortoq as the administrative center. The amalgamation was an attempt to use the region’s limited financial and cultural resources more efficiently. Although there is skepticism about the amalgamation, the region has gained Innovation South Greenland (ISG), an organization which serves as a meeting point for business development in the region (https://www.isg.gl/kl/). In the municipality’s planning, the development of tourism into a year-round activity is a central focal point for ISG.
The first organized adventure tourism in South Greenland started back in the early 1970s, and has developed slowly over the years to the current number of operators and destination options (for an overview, see: https://visitsouthgreenland.com/all-adventures-in-south-greenland/). South Greenland has also had development in cruise tourism that roughly follows the pattern in Greenland generally (see Table 2). The Disko Bay area has been particularly important. In 2020 and 2021, no tourist ships arrived, but the expectation is that cruises level will soon resume.
South Greenlandic tourism has been in a positive development in recent years, but was slowed down by Covid-19. As we see in Table 3, South Greenland had a declining relative share of total overnight stays in Greenland, but in fact increased relatively in 2020 and 2021. A probable exSouth Greenlandic tourism has been in a positive development in recent years, but was slowed down by Covid-19. As we see in Table 3, South Greenland had a declining relative share of total overnight stays in Greenland, but in fact increased relatively in 2020 and 2021. A probable explanation is that Covid-19 made South Greenland a popular destination for domestic tourism.
Some lessons for further tourism development
There are many challenges facing Arctic tourism (Rantala 2019). In a Greenlandic context, accessibility is the central parameter for the development of tourism. The planning of three new airports is particularly important. The airports in Nuuk (the capital) and Ilulissat (in the north) are underway, while the airport in South Greenland has not yet begun. At the local level, the formation of the ISG has been an important development. There are also two tourism programs at Campus Kujalleq in Qaqortoq which provide the entire country with new skills for the industry. Further, a short tourist season, and the many tourists with more and bigger cruise–ships will bring, pressure on local communities and the environment. It is also a challenge for the industry that work is seasonal and poorly paid. There is a need for more focus on environmental and social sustainability, both locally and nationally.
Icelandic Tourist Board. (2019). Tourism in Iceland in figures. https://www.ferdamalastofa.is/static/files/ferdamalastofa/tolur_utgafur/january-2019.pdf
Jóhannesson, G. T.; Welling, J.; Müller D. K., Lundmark, L., Nilsson, R. O., De la Barre, S., Granås, B., Kvidal-Røvik, T., Rantala, O., Tervo-Kankare, K., Maher, P. (2022). Arctic Tourism in Times of Change. Uncertain Futures – From Overtourism to Re-staring Tourism. Nordic Council of Ministers.
Rantala, O., de la Barre, S., Granås, B., Jóhannesson, G. Þ., Müller, D. K., Saarinen, J., Tervo-Kankare, K., Maher, P., Niska M. (2019). Arctic Tourism in Times of Change – seasonality. TemaNord 2019:528.
Guest post by Timo Halttunen, Head of Unit at Brahea Centre, Areal Research and Development, at the University of Turku, Finland.
Lifelong learning is customary concept to many of us working in research, development and innovation. The idea of learning taking place at any given moment is a positive one, adding a sense of progress and hope to the narratives of competence development. To accompany this positive notion of learning extending from the early steps of childhood to those of the elderly, another concept has been introduced to describe the spread of learning: learning in education, at work and during the leisure time. Hence, the concept of lifewide learning draws our attention to the contextual characteristics and circumstances where learning happens. However, does learning happen that easily, and do people from all walks of life have equal opportunities for learning?
In this short article, I draw attention to the circumstances and conditions that affect participation in lifelong learning. My focus is in the tourism sector and the kind of jobs available in the sector.
What do the numbers say?
According to statistics, work in tourism is low-paid, occupied by women, working in short-term contracts. From the perspective of employers, employee turnover is a challenge: there is a constant need to recruit workers for the next season, as those who occupied those positions have found employment in other service sector jobs. The ideas of lifelong and lifewide learning seem to resonate poorly to these circumstances described above. In contrast to these challenges, tourism sector beholds also positive perspectives for employment. Tourism offers jobs for people with migrant background, and international workers. Some of the jobs do not require lengthy training and can be obtained by people with learning from experience.
In the European Union, employment in tourism counts for 9 % of employment in the business sector. Respectively, in the Nordic countries, tourism forms 6-10 % of business sector jobs. As displayed in the statistics, Greece and Cyprus stand out with exceptionally high percentages (20-26%) of employment in tourism industries. In contrast, Czechia, Slovakia and Poland count only from 4 to 6 percentages.
When looking at the kind of work available, we notice that in comparison to other service sector jobs work in tourism is defined by part-time work, temporary contracts and shorter average seniority. Hence, tourism gives opportunities for the young, those with lower education background, and for the foreign citizens. With this knowledge in mind, opportunities to attain education while working in tourism sector seem less compared to the kind of jobs with full time and long-term contracts. Education is an investment, and even Nordic countries offer free of charge education to their citizens, participation in education at a personal level comes with costs, and those are often related to not being able to work while studying, thus not being able to make the ends meet financially.
According to statistics, all Nordic countries have a high rate of participation in education when compared to the EU average. However, when looking deeper into the statistics of how people from different social categories participate in education, we find out that the low-skilled and part-time workers participate less in education than the high skilled and in full-time or permanent work.
According to the OECD, workers with less attachment to the labour market have more trouble accessing education). At the same time, recent megatrends such as automatization and digitalization are predicted to cause rise in non-standard work and a reduction in job stability. (OECD, 2019).
Lifelong learning in tourism: Possibilities?
Coming back to the question of lifelong and lifewide learning, what can education providers do in making learning affordances available for people in tourism sector? Looking at the kind of education we provide, the new perspectives of micro credentials and digital open badges may hold a promise of change for the industry. Micro-credentials are shorter and smaller modules or courses of study, offering a more flexible and targeted way of professional development. By splitting studies into smaller modules, educators can make their offering more in line with the social conditions and circumstances of adult learners – in short, making it possible to participate in lifelong learning. Furthermore, with these bite-sized portions of training, workers in tourism sector may not only partake in education while at work, but also attain in education during the low season, preparing them for improved work conditions and contracts for the coming high season.
Eurostat (2020): European Union Labour force survey. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20210702-1. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
Eurostat (2022): The EU tourism labour market in 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/edn-20190306-1. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
Eurostat (2020): Tourism vital to employment in several Member states. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20200415-1. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
During the last decades, most Nordic destinations have tried to increase the number of tourist arrivals. In recent years, before the pandemic, tourist arrivals secured continued growth in Nordic countries’ most popular destinations. This growth has in turn caused crowding challenges. Crowding is labelled ‘overtourism’ in academic literature and causes an ongoing debate among researchers. But overtourism has created a substantial public debate as well. One of the dilemmas is that overtourism is related to a few destinations only. Most of the areas in the Nordics are underpopulated and under-visited. There is room for a substantial increase in the number of inhabitants and visitors in these areas.
Overtourism in the Nordic Countries
Let us give some examples of overtourism from the pre-pandemic period in Nordic countries. These examples are not exhaustive, but might function as illustrations. In Denmark, Copenhagen is the most attractive destination. A high share of the visitors to the capital of Denmark – around 87% – tend to stay in and around the inner-city, especially the canal district Nyhavn. Nyhavn is well-known for its colourful merchant houses. The concentrated inflow of tourists in the city’s heart strains urban life with increased noise and traffic levels.
In Norway, examples of overtourism are Flåm and Lofoten. Several newspaper articles have documented the problem of large queues. In summer 2019, travellers had to wait for 5 hours to get a place on a ferry to Lofoten, a group of islands in Nothern Norway. On the mainland, in the same area, no queuing occurred.
Lapland is Finland’s northernmost region bordering Russia, Sweden, Norway and the Baltic Sea. Lapland is famous for its ski resorts, Northern Lights and subarctic wilderness. However, the most popular activity in recent years is husky rides. The growing interest in husky sledging puts the animals at risk. The tourist season in this region is short, between three and four months every year. A short season, combined with increasing demand, put a lot of stress on dogs and operators.
The arrival of the pandemic
Declared as a pandemic on 11 March 2020 by the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Coronavirus (Covid-19) outbreak has heavily influenced the travel and tourism industry worldwide. The travel and tourism sectors have been affected by travel restrictions, quarantines, lockdowns and mandatory testing. These pandemic measures have created volatile and unpredictable business and travel environments.The global tourism industry now looks into a third year of uncertainty. Some researchers argue that the COVID-19 crisis should be a turning point, and that a return to pre-pandemic overtourism phenomena is undesirable and also unlikely to happen. However, according to Gössling and Scheiggart (2021) there is minimal evidence that the crisis has changed or will change tourism at an aggregated level. On this question, the future will give us the answers.
The pandemic has also taught us some other lessons regarding to how people react to different behaviour from government, individuals and companies. Based on a research project funded by the research council of Norway, with researchers from Italy, the US and Norway, we have now learned more about how these actions might influence travel patterns.
In an experiment, researchers exposed respondents for information containing a government that responded to the pandemic in either a good or bad way. The study showed that bad politics regarding government responses to the pandemic (i.e. ignoring the dangers of the virus, not imposing any social distancing, and not listening to medical advice) might generate bad feelings like anger, disgust, and scornfulness in the population. Those negative feelings will, in turn, impact travel intentions among tourists. Bad governmental response of pandemics might impose a stronger desire (and more travelling too) to travel among the population. However, the impact is evident only for one group of people. As human beings, we might be described with two different individual characteristics. Some of us are highly individualistic, and others are highly collectivistic-oriented. Being highly individualistic means that they are highly competitive oriented, like to make decisions on their own, and are also more likely to travel alone or organize their travel as an individual. Their counterparts are collectivistic-oriented persons, who are more concerned about their group members’ well-being than their own needs, and they are more likely to travel in groups. Most people can be placed along a continuum between those two extreme points. However, the distinction between individualism and collectivism might help us better understand possibilities and challenges regarding travel patterns in post-pandemic time.
The research from Western Norway University of Applied Sciences shows that individualistically oriented tourists tend to travel in defiance if the government in their country mistreat a pandemic situation. The collectivistic oriented tourists don’t have this tendency. Collectivistic oriented tourists have a low desire to travel during a pandemic, independently of how their government treat the pandemic. Combined with existing knowledge that individualistically oriented tourists have higher spending, are more involved in special interest tourism, and tend to stay longer in a travelled area, those tourists might be a part of the solution of the overtorusim issue. Tourists visiting longer in an area are more likely to spread than short-time visitors. Short-time visitors are more likely only to target the main ( and crowdy) attractions. The individualistically oriented tourists represent more diverse interests than their collectivistic counterparts too. This might contribute to spreading those tourists on many different types of activities and thereby reduce the overtourism problem.
One example of a special interest activity in Norway is “Landsskyttarstevent” (i.e. a shooting festival). The festival is hosted in rural areas in Norway. The event is a one-time activity that lasts for eight days and it draws 10-15.000 people every year. And more important, it’s located outside the main tourist destinations in the country.
Gössling, S. and N Schweiggart (2022). Two years of COVID-19 and tourism: what we learned, and what we should have learned. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 30(4)
Oklevik, O., Gössling, S., Hall, M., Steen-Jacobsen, K., Grøtte I.P. (2019). Overtourism, optimization and destination performance indicators: a case study of activities in Fjord Norway. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 27(12); 1804-1824.
Oklevik. O, Kwiatkowksi, G., Preuss, H. and A. Kurdyś-Kujawska (2021). Contextual engagement in event visitors’ experience and satisfaction. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism.
Serving as a forum for exchanging best practices and experiences for education and knowledge development within Nordic Tourism, the central themes of the network meeting were:
Life-long learning: How can educators continuously update their skills and competences
Nordic Tourism: What makes it unique
Tourism lessons learned: From remote locations
The network meet also had scheduled in workshops to continue working on the ideas created at our first network meet in Esbjerg, Denmark – namely projects within digital competence development in the tourism sector, and development of Nordic coastal tourism.
Day 1: Perspectives to life-long learning and Developing Nordic Coastal Tourism
After a warm welcome, Timo Halttunen, Head of Unit at Brahea Centre Areal Research and Development, at the University of Turku, gave us a presentation about professional learning, the reform of continuous learning in Finland, as well as the challenges the tourism sector faces with regards to continuous learning – a challenge not only unique to the Nordics, but to the EU sector as a whole! An interesting fact, was that the Nordic countries were ahead of the curve in Europe with regards to continuous learning, yet the tourism sector still lagged behind when comparing to other industries.
The presentation was followed by a great discussion on key areas that TourNord’s partner institutions could focus on in their respective countries when it comes to current students, as well as plans for continuous learning throughout a career of a tourism sector employee.
After the presentation and discussion, Gregory Kwiatkowski from Western Norway University of Applied Sciences and Christian Dragin-Jensen from Business Academy SouthWest led a work-meeting about how to progress from our desire to jointly work on developing a Nordic Coastal Tourism project (from our network meet in Esbjerg). We have excitedly concluded to create a book: “Developing Nordic Coastal Tourism” with all partners contributing to chapters, as well as inviting other practitioners and scholars to contribute! Gregory and Christian will serve as editors. Mia Post-Lundgaard from Business Academy SouthWest also raised the important notion of the book’s necessary contribution to not only academics and practitioners, but also to students. Moreover, the important question was also asked that if we are a Nordic cooperative, should the book not also be available in (at least some) of our Nordic languages?
In the evening, we were introduced to a Turku tourism destination concept: The Turku Food Walk, at local restaurant Di Trevi. The Turku food walk is an initiative by Visit Turku and its partners to showcase the best of the city’s culinary scene with just one card. That is, for a modest fee, tourists can visit an array of restaurants and sample many dishes from many different restaurants. The tour is ideal if you’re new to the city or visiting Turku and are interested in the food culture of the Nordics. It was fascinating to hear how many of the city’s restaurants found benefits in coopetition (the act of cooperating between competing companies) to give tourists a more holistic experience of the city’s food scene.
Day 2: A day of Senses in Tourism Research and Experience Development
Our second day was a a true day of exchanging best practices. This day was dedicated to exploring how the University of Turku research the use of senses in developing and understanding experiences. The first item on the order of the day was a fascinating presentation by Emmi Järvi, Project Communications Specialist, titled “Multidisciplinary research platform for producing new scientific knowledge and consumer understanding for society and businesses”. The research platform was using in-house facilities at the University of Turku campus, namely an experimental restaurant called Flavoria, and a multi-sensory room full of modern technologies to enhance sensory experiences.
The experimental restaurant was a veritable smorgasbord of data collecting points, from how guests selected their food, to how much bio-waste they generated, as well as desired portion sizes. The multi-sensory room, titled Aistikattila, is an immersive multi-sensory space for research and teaching and for hosting innovation workshops, seminars and events. More specifically:
Aistikattila provides an interesting setting for e.g. co-creation, product, and group interview studies. With studies measuring the effects of different environments can be discovered, how a certain audiovisual environment or augmented reality affects, for example, eating experiences, human behavior, or sensory experiences. The research possibilities go beyond the above-mentioned framework; the object of study can well be a technological solution
Inspired by sitting in the Aistikattila space, we had a double brainstorming session on how we could work together on the following:
Creating a blended intensive programme. Led by Gregory Kwiatkowski, we discussed on which common tourism topics where we could lead a blended intensive program – the area of Event Management drawing particular interest. Great experiences were shared on Dania Academy’s efforts by Henrik Pahus and Mikkel Lodahl of their summer school programs in Vietnam and elsewhere around the world. It was decided to continue this avenue to create a blended intensive programme for our Nordic partners!
Continue our work on digital competences within tourism. Led by Timo Halttunen and Christian Dragin-Jensen, an intense discussion was had with all partners, but followed with a fruitful creation of a concept note for an Erasmus+ application (further developed from our ideas at the 1st network meet in Esbjerg). Specifically, a project which focuses on creating a tourism platform to better define digital skills and competences within tourism, how to upskill and reskill existing tourism employees, assessing learning in digital contexts, and how to create a blueprint for micro-credentials within tourism educations. Trine Thomsen from Business Academy SouthWest also highlighted the tremendous importance of linking digital skills with lifelong learning, as the realm of the digital is simply moving so fast, that what is taught at the beginning of an education, may no longer be relevant when students receive their degree!
In the afternoon, we continued along our journeys of senses – more specifically, the sense of sight. A presentation was given by Marjaana Puurtinen, Adj. Professor at the University of Turku, on Eye-tracking technology in educational research: higher-order cognition, learning in different domains and contexts. This was a fascinating presentation on not only how we can optimize teaching by using eye-tracking technology, but also how we could design tourist experiences. One of Marjaana’s projects was about designing a better museum experience by eye-tracking guests throughout the museum, to gain a novel and unique understanding of what guests spent the majority of their time looking at, as well as discovering what elements were most interactive for them. A future project we surely can’t wait to see more of!
The session was followed by a great discussion on how can we use these technologies in understanding professional learning, particularly when comparing to “hands-on task” learning, vs. theoretical and conceptualisation learning.
Day 3: Designing a “hands-on” museum visit – how a multi-sensory exhibition was developed with researchers and stakeholders
The final day of our 2nd network meet was an excursion day to 40,000+ exhibition at the Forum Marinum. Here we were guided by Ira Lahovuo, Project Manager at the City of Turku, and the main driving force behind the exhibition, an output of an Interreg project, Archipelago Access. Turku is the main city closely located to Finland’s famous archipelago, home to more than 40,000 islands. The project’s summary was the following:
Sustainable nature and culture-based archipelago tourism are still characterized by a large number of SMEs, public actors, uncoordinated promotion and scattered information. Thanks to Archipelago Access, Turku and Stockholm archipelagos join forces and invite Åland along to increase the attractiveness of the whole archipelago area.
Guided by Ira, we were given a unique insight in how many different stakeholders took part in creating the exhibition, from digital and sound specialists, tourism experts and marine biologists. Much focus was placed on finding the perfect balance between informing potential visitors about the region and the difficulties it faces (loss of biodiversity, climate change, etc.), but also to show how it could be an attractive place to visit – when done right.
All the participating TourNord members would like to thank the University of Turku and its partners for their warm hospitality, and a fantastic program which ensured that our network meet serve:
1. As a forum for exchanging best practices and experiences for education and knowledge development within Nordic Tourism 2. To discover and implement innovative ways of teaching to benefit educators and students in preparing them for the current/future demands of Nordic Tourism
3. To promote & advance student/staff mobility amongst partners for learning, innovation and R&D activities within NT.
In this short entry, I argue how the concept of a “Just Destination” must embrace resident empowerment in destination governance and see it as a condition for social sustainability.
What is “Just Governance”?
Just governance brings citizens and institutions closer and engages them in processes and structures that build societies (Bramwell & Lane, 2011). It considers “ethical principles that aim towards justice and the good of the place, the people and things in it, and the good of those who visit it” (Jamal, 2019). Ensuring just practices toward the residents and their natural and cultural goods requires addressing tangible environmental, ecological, economic, and social/social-political impacts and intangibles such as human–cultural and environmental relationships within the destination.
In sustainable destinations, justice must be the leading principle guiding tourism and the first principle for evaluating the effectiveness of tourism governance. In this regard, I propose that just destinations consider three-justice domains: distribution, recognition, and representation (Fraser, 2008).
A just distribution occurs “to everyone’s advantage and at the same time position of authority and responsibility must be accessible to all” (Rawls, 1999, p.53). Figueroa (2006) rightly notes that the most common usage of just distribution pertains to…something missing here?. Distribution issues underlying tourism governance may include equitable distribution of tourism-related risks, benefits, and costs and access to information, knowledge, or economic limitations. However, destination governance that only targets allocation fails to consider ‘who’ gets to be represented in decision-making or who gets to define what ‘justice’ means (Fraser, 2000).
Recognition tends to be seen as a remedy to distribution issues. Fraser (2008) considered recognition a precondition to a membership in a political community, whereas Young (1990), urged that recognition “requires explicitly acknowledging and attending to group differences” (p.3). Participatory procedures may reinforce recognition in local governance as they create opportunities for different actors to come together to recognize each other’s interests and perspectives in tourism development.
Representation can be seen as an essential step to mitigate conflicts in tourism destinations as it draws attention to the idea that the outcome of tourism decision-making must equally represent residents’ views and ambitions (Fraser, 2008). In this context, destination governance concerned with local or regional wellbeing must improve celebrate social differences and foster participants’ self-development and self-determination.
Resident empowerment as a key to a Just Destination?
Fraser’s critical approach to justice is based on the principle of participatory parity, where systematic social inequalities are eliminated. This can be done through direct participation (Figueroa, 2006; Whyte, 2010). Such norm of direct participation requires that “all agents who may benefit or be harmed by the outcomes of institutional proceedings and social transitions have the opportunity to veto or formally accept the risks” (Whyte, 2010, p.77). However, the sole policy focus on participatory procedures overlooks local power struggles and structural inequalities. Participatory procedures are unlikely to produce just outcomes when some stakeholders dominate others regarding human, financial, or structural resources (Fung and Wright, 2001). Residents must both, be willing to participate and have the capacity to do so.
Resident empowerment is the key to effective destination governance (Beaumont and Dredge, 2010) and crucial to “people, organizations, and communities to gain mastery over their affairs” (Rappaport, 1987, p. 122). The political domain of resident empowerment is probably one that is most discussed. Its essence lies in that individuals or groups enhance their competency for tourism governance and are thus able to influence the governance process (Strzelecka & Wicks, 2015). The core idea of political empowerment for a destination’s social sustainability, is to shift power to people and communities to engage in the governance.
The three-justice domains as a means to empower residents
The transformative capacity of empowerment lies in its three-component structure. The intrapersonal component refers to the manner in which individuals think about themselves and includes concepts of self-efficacy and perceived competence (Zimmerman & Zahniser, 1991). The interactional component addresses individuals’ ability to “develop a critical understanding of the forces that shape their environment and knowledge of the resources required and methods to access those resources to produce social change.” (Speer, 2000, p.52) Empowering processes engage residents in learning about opportunities to influence the aspects of their environment and increase their ability to influence the decision-making process (Christens, 2012).
Distribution recognition and representation facilitate processes transforming local reality by reinforcing the centrality of residents (Bartholo et al., 2008, p. 104). However, while empowerment appears to be the core concept in political justice governance, it has not been previously theorized in relation to the three-justice domains. Frankly, empowerment is a fluid phenomenon, it may increase or decrease over time, and it may fluctuate at different points in time. This fluctuation over time, of course, implicates a reciprocal relationship between resident empowerment and justice in tourism governance where the justness of tourism governance could ebb and flow over time, too resulting in empowerment being a continual process where there is no resting or ‘having arrived’ at just tourism governance. Essentially, empowerment can be seen as a precondition for and an outcome of just government. For instance, just governance can empower residents with the capacity to initiate social change. In return, this social change modifies the form that empowerment will take.
Considering resident empowerment as a kind of precondition to resident participation in tourism planning and policymaking means that the empowering method must acknowledge and attend to existing local circumstances. Individual and group local identities, experiences, knowledge will contribute to residents’ self-efficacy or perceived control and motivate them to engage in destination governance. The above mechanism reinforces the resident’s perception of a more equal distribution of power to influence decision-making (Fraser, 2008). Residents who feel empowered are also more likely to see opportunities for representing their perspective on destination development. The representation domain of justice consists of two reciprocal forces. On the one hand, knowledgeable residents who feel encouraged and motivated will seek to represent their perspective in tourism planning and development. On the other hand, policymaking mechanisms for policy justice such as participatory procedure will enable those motivated residents to pursue their views and ambitions.
An equal distribution of resources, greater mutual recognition, and more inclusive processes enable the empowerment of local groups by facilitating direct participation and increasing their effectiveness. Empowered residents gain a sense of sociopolitical control in their particular situations. The sense of control among residents defines the extent to which they are motivated and see themselves as capable of using social and political resources (Zimmerman and Zahniser, 1991). In reference to recognition, representation, and distribution, empowerment is more than participation, “it includes the processes that lead people to perceive themselves as able and entitled to make decisions” (Rowlands, 1997, p.14). It reinforces recognition, representation, and distribution efforts in the destination governance and thus remains a precondition for the social sustainability of tourism destinations.
Bartholo R, Delamaro M, and Bursztyn I. Tourism for Whom? (2008). Different Paths to Development and Alternative Experiments in Brazil. Latin American Perspectives. 35(3), 103-119.
Beaumont, N. and Dredge, D. (2010). Local tourism governance: a comparison of three network approaches, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1), 7-28.
Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (2011). Critical research on the governance of tourism and sustainability, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19 (4-5), 411-421.
Christens, B.D. (2012). Toward Relational Empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 114-128.
Figueroa, R. (2006). Evaluating environmental justice claims. In J. Bauer (Ed.), Forging Environmentalism: Justice, livelihood, and contested environments (pp. 360-376). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe
Fraser, N. (2008). Scales of Justice. Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World. Cambridge, G.-B, Malden, E.-U, Polity Press.
Fung A. and Wright E.O. (2001). Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. Politics & Society, 29(1), 5-41.
Jamal, T. (2019). Justice and Ethics in Tourism (1st ed.). Routledge.
Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology 15 (2), 121-148.
Rawls J. (1999). A Theory of Justice, Revised Edition, Harvard University Press.
Rowlands, J. (1997). Questioning empowerment: Working with women in Honduras. Oxford, UK: Oxfam.
Speer, P. (2000). Intrapersonal and interactional empowerment: Implications for theory. Journal of Community Psychology 28(1), 51-61.
Strzelecka M. & Wicks B. E. (2015) Community Participation and Empowerment in Rural Post-Communist Societies: Lessons from the Leader Approach in Pomerania, Poland, Tourism Planning & Development, 12(4), 381-397.
Whyte, K.P. (2010). An Environmental Justice Framework for Indigenous Tourism. Environmental Philosophy, 7(2), 75-92.
Young, I.M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Zimmerman, M.A., Zahniser, J.H. (1991). Refinements of sphere‐specific measures of perceived control: Development of a sociopolitical control scale. J. Community Psychology, 19, 189-204.