Foreword
Thinking on Tourist Destinations as Complex Systems in Times of Uncertainty
Covid-19, climate change and the increasing social, political and ecological tensions of today's world have enriched both academic and political debates on tourism (Cheer et al. 2019; Prayag 2020; Gössling and Higham 2021). These tensions represent new challenges for tourist destinations, while also intensifying others that were already latent (Prideaux et al. 2020).
From November 8 to 10 2022, the 11th edition of the international multidisciplinary symposium AsTRES (Association for Tourism, Research and Higher Education) was held in Nice. The aim of this event, Tourism Agility in Times of Crises: Replications, Accelerations, Reinventions.? - which led to the publication of this book - was to identify the elements that characterize the "agile" dimension of tourism through a multidisciplinary approach. As suggested in the call for papers, agility or even flexibility should enable tourism and tourist destinations to cope with crises and periods of uncertainty.
Agility can be understood as the capacity of complex spaces, such as tourist destinations, to anticipate and capitalize on ongoing changes. Based on this definition, concepts related to complexity were employed throughout the symposium to analyze how destinations, as places, can adapt, evolve and reduce their vulnerability in the face of crises. The various speakers explored how the iterative, incremental and adaptive structure of agility could be particularly valuable in developing economically, socially and environmentally successful strategies.
In this context, this preliminary contribution to the works presented in this volume seeks to broadly reflect on the need to consider complexity and agility in shaping new alternative pathways to articulate what can be termed "tourism transitions" across various levels or scales.
The evolution of destinations and the creation of trajectories
Research on the evolution, transformation and change in tourist destinations has demonstrated that they are in constant flux (Saarinen 2004) and can respond to critical events due to their dynamism and forward-looking vision. Destinations find the necessary resources to overcome their vulnerability and adapt to new scenarios in diverse ways (Brouder et al. 2017). It is also well established that the transformation of tourist destinations extends far beyond models based solely on tourism performance indicators (Sanz Ibáñez and Anton Clavé 2014). Destinations can be differentiated by the evolving quality of their tourism offerings as they adapt to changes (Equipe MIT 2002), as well as by the transformation of their core activities (Prideaux 2004).
Research on the transformation of tourist destinations has also shown that, during times of crisis, they shape their sustainability through innovation and learning (Hudson 2010), which act as mechanisms for building capacity to overcome vulnerability and increase adaptability (Cheer and Lew 2017; Saarinen and Gill 2018). Historical analyses have illuminated these processes (Walton 1983), as have the application of models like the tourism area lifecycle (Butler 1980, 2014), the study of restructuring dynamics (Agarwal 2002) and investigations into the trajectories of tourist destinations (Coëffe and Stock 2021). In all cases, adaptation strategies lead to varied outcomes, ranging from the redevelopment and reconfiguration of tourism dynamics (Anton Clavé 2012) to the metamorphosis of places (Clivaz et al. 2014), or even the abandonment of tourism activities altogether (Baum 1998).
To grasp the diversity of these situations and the outcomes of these change processes, it is necessary to employ complex, nonlinear and non-deterministic conceptual and analytical models. This analysis can be approached through the lens of evolutionary economic geography (EEG) (Boschma and Lambooy 1999). Key concepts within EEG, such as path dependence (Bramwell and Cox 2009; Ma and Hassink 2013), path creation (Gill and Williams 2014), path plasticity (Halkier and Therkelsen 2013) and path shaping (Bramwell 2011), are useful for understanding how tourist destinations transform into complex places governed by varied processes interacting across different scales (Benner 2023).
We can identify three fundamental pillars that simultaneously influence and distinguish the evolutionary performance of tourist destinations and determine their agility: the role of actors, context and dependency (Sanz Ibáñez and Anton Clavé 2022). From this perspective, the dynamics of destinations cannot be viewed as a simple linear trajectory from less developed to more consolidated states. Instead, this evolution results from multiple forces that produce a diversity of situations, each with different timelines and cycles.
Within this conceptual framework, the intervention of actors can deliberately and consciously shift evolutionary paths away from their inertia (Baekkelund 2021). The context either creates or limits the possibilities for economic actions and interactions (Li and Bathelt 2011). Lastly, past events and decisions, even the most random or involuntary, have long-term consequences (Martin and Sunley 2006).
As a result, each destination, shaped by its own geographical, socioeconomic and cultural conditions, the negotiating power among its various subgroups of actors, its technological penetration, leadership and the governance regime that has emerged, formulates specific responses to the challenges posed by current global change forces and local transitions (Cheer et al. 2021). A clear example of this is the diversity of policies implemented in response to climate change in French winter sports resorts, where organizational transformation and actors' responsiveness were critical in understanding the trajectory of these spaces (Rech et al. 2019).
Uncertainty and the adaptation processes of destinations
Recent disruptive trends in tourism production and consumption, such as low-cost travel, the rise of peer-to-peer platforms (like Airbnb, for example), Web 2.0, the climate emergency and social networks, have forced destinations to adapt more quickly and confront urgent social, environmental and economic challenges (Fayos-Solà and Cooper 2019). Other more or less long shocks, whether ecological (e.g. Hurricane Katrina), health-related (e.g. Covid-19), economic (e.g. global financial crises) or political (e.g. wars and regional political instability), have also impacted tourist destinations to varying degrees. Depending on their capacity to adapt, these destinations have initiated processes of reorganization, shifted to a different state, or renewed themselves (Brouder 2020).
Thus, while the pandemic was seen by many as an opportunity to critically reassess the prior trajectory of tourism growth, and even used to develop alternative research and action scenarios (Bianchi 2020), there have been diverse responses and dynamics at the destination level, driven by local characteristics and the power interactions among decision-makers. For instance, some destinations have started implementing actions that, at least conceptually, emphasize degrowth (Langer and Schumude 2024), while others have focused their development on social and environmental well-being, promoted sustainable consumption among both residents and visitors, or advanced corporate social responsibility programs aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (European Parliament 2021). Nevertheless, apart from some political actions, there have been notable market inertia following the Covid period, with the pandemic merely acting as a temporary pause in many destinations' growth dynamics and ability to attract visitors (Mansilla and Hughes 2021).
It is also well documented that tourism is a growing source of conflict within the communities where it develops. This may be due to nuisances (noise, waste, privatization of spaces, incivility and crime), structural transformations in the form of tourism development (such as the opening of hotels, the proliferation of legal and illegal tourist apartments, disruption of commercial activities, transformation of buildings, rising rent prices and gentrification) or the commodification of culture and the environment, which often leads to folklorization: the loss of identity, dilution of cultural identity and the overexploitation of heritage (Novy and Colomb 2019).
The above points clearly illustrate the link between uncertainty and tourism, particularly the relationship between uncertainty and the evolution of destinations (Ghaderi et al. 2015). These changes are shaped by the actions and interactions (whether agile or not) of actors and their ability to adapt or create new trajectories in response to structural disruptions or situational shocks, in addition to local challenges (Lew 2014). In this context, the concept of resilience, which originates from disaster studies and challenges the sustainability-based approach to analyzing the transformation of socioeconomic systems (Vale and Campanella 2005; Mehmood 2016), is especially relevant for analyzing destinations as complex socioeconomic and environmental systems in today's era of uncertainties.
In this regard, analytical models such...
