Progress in Tourism Management: From the Geography of Tourism to Geographies of Tourism – A Review

Abstract

This Progress in Tourism Management paper seeks to review the development of geographical contributions to the study of tourism over the last decade. Given the limited number of surveys of geography published in academic journals since the 1970s, it is particularly timely to question and debate where the subject has evolved to, the current debates and issues facing those who work within the subject and where the subject will evolve in the next five years. The paper is structured around a number of distinct themes to emerge from the research activity of geographers, which is deliberately selective in its coverage due to the constraints of space, but focuses on: explaining spatialities; tourism planning and places; development and its discontents; tourism as an ‘applied’ area of research, and future prospects.

Full text

Elsevier Editorial System(tm) for Tourism Management
Manuscript Draft
Manuscript Number: JTMA-D-08-00071R1
Title: Progress in Tourism Management: From the Geography of Tourism to Geographies of Tourism - A
review
Article Type: Progress in Tourism Management
Keywords: Geography; Space; Place; Environment; Mobilities
Corresponding Author: Prof. C. Michael Hall,
Corresponding Author's Institution:
First Author: C. Michael Hall
Order of Authors: C. Michael Hall; Stephen J Page
Abstract: This Progress in Tourism Management paper seeks to review the development of geographical
contributions to the study of tourism over the last decade. Given the limited number of surveys of geography
published in academic journals since the 1970s, it is particularly timely to question and debate where the
subject has evolved to, the current debates and issues facing those who work within the subject and where
the subject will evolve in the next five years. The paper is structured around a number of distinct themes to
emerge from the research activity of geographers, which is deliberately selective in its coverage due to the
constraints of space, but focuses on: explaining spatialities; tourism planning and places; development and
its discontents; tourism as an 'applied' area of research, and future prospects.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
1
Progress in Tourism Management Paper
Progress in Tourism Management: From the Geography of Tourism to
Geographies of Tourism – A review
C.M. Hall* & S.J. Page
C. Michael Hall, Department of Management, University of Canterbury, Christchurch,
New Zealand & Department of Geography, University of Oulu, Finland.
michael.hall@canterbury.ac.nz
Stephen Page, Department of Marketing, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, FK9
4LA
s.j.page@stir.ac.uk
* Corresponding Author
* Title page with author details

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
1
Progress in Tourism Management Paper
Progress in Tourism Management: From the Geography of Tourism to
Geographies of Tourism – A review
C.M. Hall* & S.J. Page
C. Michael Hall, Department of Management, University of Canterbury, Christchurch,
New Zealand & Department of Geography, University of Oulu, Finland.
michael.hall@canterbury.ac.nz
Stephen Page, Department of Marketing, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, FK9
4LA
s.j.page@stir.ac.uk
* Corresponding Author
* Manuscript (remove anything that identifies authors)

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
2
Abstract
This Progress in Tourism Management paper seeks to review the development of
geographical contributions to the study of tourism over the last decade. Given the
limited number of surveys of geography published in academic journals since the 1970s,
it is particularly timely to question and debate where the subject has evolved to, the
current debates and issues facing those who work within the subject and where the
subject will evolve in the next five years. The paper is structured around a number of
distinct themes to emerge from the research activity of geographers, which is
deliberately selective in its coverage due to the constraints of space, but focuses on:
explaining spatialities; tourism planning and places; development and its discontents;
tourism as an ‘applied’ area of research, and future prospects.
Keywords: Geography; Space; Place; Environment; Mobilities

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
3
1.Introduction
Geography has as its central concerns a focus on place, space and environment.
Geographers and the various institutions of geography, in the form of academic
associations, departments, journals and other geographical oriented publishing outlets,
have also long contributed to the study of tourism (Lew 2001; Hall and Page 2006),
enriched by a long tradition of doctoral theses in tourism by geographers or supervised
by geographers (Jafari and Aaser 1988). However, the impending or semi-retirement of
a number of geographers who have contributed substantially to the study of tourism in
recent decades such as Richard Butler (Western Ontario, Canada; Surrey, UK), Felix
Juelg (Vienna, Austria), Peter Murphy (Victoria, Canada; La Trobe, Australia), John
Pigram (University of New England, Australia) and Geoff Wall (Waterloo, Canada),
combined with the emergence of a new generation of geographers and geographical
thought, suggests that a review of the state of the field is extremely timely for Tourism
Management as it has almost been publishing articles by geographers for nearly 30
years. Given the limited number of reviews published on the field and its contribution to
tourism studies and management (Pearce 1979; Mitchell and Murphy 1991; Butler
2004), a review of recent literature is particularly pertinent to question and debate where
the subject has evolved to, the current debates and issues facing those who work within
the subject and where the subject will evolve in the future. Much of the interest by
geographers in tourism and the wider domain of leisure studies can be traced or dated to
an interest in tourism and recreation by geographers that mirrors the pre-1945
development of the discipline and the post-war boom in many countries of geography as
a subject of study in Universities and other institutes of higher education (McMurray
1954; Wolfe 1964; Hall and Page 2006). Nevertheless, while the field has some long

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
4
established theoretical and applied interests a number of substantial new developments
and research foci have emerged in recent years, leading to the notion of tourism
geographies, i.e. that there is more than one paradigmatic approach towards the
geography of tourism and tourism management.
At an institutional level the geography of tourism appears at first glance to be
reasonably healthy as demonstrated by recent contributions to a Companion to Tourism
(Lew, Hall and Williams 2004), published as part of the Blackwell Companions to
Geography Series, which are predominantly by geographers. This study also documents
the dominance of geographical subject matter in journals indexed by databases such as
CABI’s Leisure, Recreation and Tourism Abstracts as well as the database Geography
illustrating continuity in the subjects interest since reviews by Pearce (1979) and more
substantive volumes of research outputs that emerged in the 1980s and 1990s with the
development of a number of influential texts by geographers (i.e. Mathieson and Wall
1978; Pearce 1981, 1989; Shaw and Wiliams 1994; Hall and Page 1999) to serve the
growing demand for undergraduate education predominantly within programmes based
in geography departments and, to a lesser extent, in environmental studies and resource
management. In educational terms, the subject would also still appear to be buoyant and
still in an expansionist mode, though clearly not of the same scale as the 1980s, when
much of the initial growth occurred globally. Furthermore, as detailed below,
geographers have made a substantial contribution to the field of tourism overall.
The geography of tourism is now taught as a course in over 50 geography departments
in North America while in Europe a number of departments of geography have
expanded to include tourism as an offering, with some even changing names to
represent this shift, e.g. University of Iceland. Indeed many institutions even offer joint

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
5
degrees where tourism and geography co-exist side by side. This has particularly been
the case in the transition economies of Eastern Europe where tourism has been regarded
as a way of increasing the relevance of geographical department offerings. Several
geography associations also have specialist groups with tourism as a focus, often in
conjunction with leisure and recreation. The latter area being historically important in
terms of the development of tourism geography (Butler 2004) but which, as a result of
increasing mobility in society which has blurred the distinction between recreation and
tourism, is increasingly used virtually interchangeably with tourism, especially day-
tripping (Hall 2005b). Academic societies with specialty groups include the Association
of American Geographers, the Canadian Association of Geographers and the Royal
Geographical Society/Institute of British Geographers, while strong specialist groups
also exist in French and German speaking geography. At the international level a
tourism oriented group has existed in various forms since 1972 in the International
Geographical Union (IGU), the global association of national geography associations.
From 1994-2000 it was known as the Study Group of the Geography of Sustainable
Tourism, while from 2000-2008 it was a Commission for the Study of Tourism, Leisure
and Global Change. Name changes that themselves reflect the shifting focus of the
geographical imagination. The Commission was particularly successful in attracting
participants at conferences and meetings and had some of the largest paper programmes
at the IGU meetings in Durban (2002), Glasgow (2004) and Brisbane (2006).
A specific journal, Tourism Geographies, edited by Alan Lew and published by Taylor
and Francis, is also available while the publication of a number of tourism geography
texts in multiple editions also indicates ongoing demand for geographically oriented
teaching material (e.g. Pigram and Jenkins 1999; Shaw and Williams 2002; Lew et al.
2004; Shaw and Williams 2004) although a number of these are more regionally

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
6
oriented works that may be used for courses on travel geography (e.g. Davidoff et al.
2002; Hudman and Jackson 2003; Boniface and Cooper 2005; Lew, Hall and Timothy
2008). Nevertheless, tourism geography usually only gets passing acknowledgement in
some of the disciplinary surveys of geography (e.g. Johnston and Sidaway 2004)
including reviews in geography journals (Gibson 2008).
With the institutional grounding of tourism geography it could be assumed that the field
has a firm foundation. However, one of the growing trends for geographers with
doctorates in tourism, at least in Anglo-American geography, is for them to migrate to
teach and research tourism in business schools with many focusing on business issues
(e.g. see many of the contributions in Coles and Hall (2008) volume on international
business and tourism), although environment and place remain significant themes. For
example, in the UK the graduate tourism programme that used to be based in the
Department of Geography at the University of Exeter is now based in the Business
School, while in Australia and New Zealand a number of business school tourism
programmes are staffed by geographers. As Hall and Page (2006) observed, themselves
both now located in business schools, the growing movement of many geographers
away from departments of geography may potentially serve to weaken the field of the
geography of tourism in the long-run, especially as institutional pressures may mean
that such individuals are not encouraged to maintain contact with the field through
research and publishing.
The difficulties encountered by tourism geographers are arguably faced by a number of
geography’s sub-disciplines (Johnston and Sidaway 2004). As Janice Monk, then
President of the Association of American Geographers noted that ‘it seems unlikely that
the movement towards interdisciplinary and hybrid units will diminish in the near

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
7
future. While remaining vigilant in supporting geography as a distinctive field, we also
need to pursue efforts that will permit geographers to thrive in new territories and to
learn to build and sustain interdisciplinary ties’ (Monk 2001: 4), For example, in areas
such as geographical information systems and techniques of spatial analysis.
Undoubtedly many of the main contemporary issues with which tourism management
deals (i.e. environmental change, destination management, human mobility) are related
to geography. Yet disciplinary relations and spaces are, as Monk herself acknowledged,
shaped by local academic politics and funding opportunities. Indeed, the closing or
structuring of academic space has been a significant area of discussion by geographers
with respect to the role of various national research assessment exercises (Page 2003,
2005a; Hall 2005a; McKercher 2005; Coles and Hall 2006), in which tourism has
usually been ‘lost’ in the interdisciplinary spaces between business and social science
disciplines or has been explicitly tied in with business disciplines. For example, in the
case of New Zealand’s Performance Based Research Funding tourism is assessed as part
of the marketing and tourism category within business and management. Such a
situation significantly problematises the place of tourism geography in institutional
terms. Should researchers in countries which have national research performance
assessments submit to social science or business studies panels, or in some cases
environmental science or sports? Regardless of which panels submissions are made too,
tourism historically may not have been favourably considered as an appropriate subject
of academic study and tourism journals may not be known by members of review
panels, particularly given the relatively limited numbers of tourism and even geography
journals in bibliometric analyses such as ISI (Paasi 2005; Hall 2006a). Indeed, such a
situation is mirrored in Gibson’s (2008) comment with respect that

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
8
Tourism geography has its own geography of production and circulation,
variegated dif- ferently than for other parts of geography. It still struggles to
pervade publishing in ‘global’ journals, and yet, when eventually appearing
elsewhere, tourism geography appears to be on the whole more cosmopolitan. To
me this seems an important – even defining – contradiction of tourism in
contemporary geography (Gibson 2008: 418).
Table 1 indicates the publication of tourism oriented articles in selected leading
international geography journals from 1998 to 2007. Although Progress in Human
Geography had not published any tourism specific papers in the time period examined it
should be noted that it published two relevant articles in 2008 (McNeil 2008), including
the first of three progress reports on the geographies of tourism by Gibson (2008)
representing the first time a systematic review of tourism has been provided by the
journal. Interestingly, Gibson (2008: 407) comments, “Although not taken seriously by
some, and still considered marginal by many, tourism constitutes an important point of
intersection within geography, and its capacity to gel critical, integrative and imperative
research appears to be increasingly realized”.
Therefore, in one sense tourism geography may find itself at a peripheral intersection of
the social sciences despite the major contribution it has made to the establishment and
development of knowledge in tourism studies. However, despite such a sanguine
possibility it is nevertheless clear that geographers have made a substantial contribution
to the study of tourism in recent years, even if, in some cases, the wider field may not
even recognise them as ‘geographers’ or their conceptualisations as ‘geographical’. For
example, McKercher’s (2008) analysis of the most frequently cited tourism scholars

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
9
indicated that nine of the 25 most cited tourism scholars from 1970 to 2007 have
graduate qualifications in geography (names and rankings: Michael Hall [3], Richard
Butler [5], Geoff Wall [8], Douglas Pearce [10], Don Getz [13], Greg Ashworth [15],
Allan Williams [19], Martin Oppermann [22], Stephen Page [23]) and seven of the 25
most cited in the period 1998-2007 (Michael Hall [1], Allan Williams [5], Stephen Page
[12], Nigel Morgan [15], Bob McKercher [18], Gareth Shaw [22], Dallen Timothy
[23]). Furthermore, as noted above, it is perhaps as inappropriate to talk of a ‘tourism
geography’ – even though there are linking concepts of space, place and environment to
such a field – as it is to talk of a single approach to tourism. Instead, while institutional
geographical collectivities exist there are in fact a range of tourism geographies marked
by differences not only in subject but also in philosophy, method, scale and funding.
The remainder of the review therefore seeks to identify some of the main developments
with respect to the various tourism geographers’ outputs primarily in relation to tourism
management since the earlier reviews by Pearce (1979), Mitchell and Murphy (1991)
and Butler (2004) and to identify some of the main contributions and contributors as
well as issues and directions. Given that entire books have been devoted to trying to
provide an overview of the field it must of course be acknowledged that space clearly
does not permit inclusion of all worthy publications, while the primary focus is also on
literature published in English.
INSERT TABLE 1 HERE
2. Explaining Spatialities
Arguably one of the most well known contributions by a geographer to the tourism field
is that of Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC). Despite criticisms that

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
10
tourism is undertheorised (Franklin and Crang 2001), usually by people whose
theoretical positions have not been taken up in the broader tourism literature as much as
their proponents would have wished, the TALC remains a clear indicator of the
importance of theory in tourism research. As Oppermann (1998: 180) noted: ‘Butler’s
model is a brilliant example of how scientific progress could and should work. …
[having] been scrutinized in many different contexts with modifications suggested to fit
specific situations and circumstances.’ The TALC is one of the most well cited articles
in tourism if not the most cited (Hall 2006a). It is not the intention to cite all articles that
reference the Butler paper over the past decade but instead to note the significance of
the publication of a two-volume edition on TALC applications and concepts edited by
Butler (2006a, 2006b).
The discussions on the TALC by the various contributors to the two volumes on
indicate the importance of understanding the diffusion of ideas, not only within
disciplines but also between disciplines. For example, a key point of debate in relation
to the TALC is the relative importance of marketing and geographical/spatial ideas
regarding life cycles, with several chapters arguing that the spatial dimensions of the
TALC have not been sufficiently appreciated in the majority of writing on the TALC
(Coles 2006; Hall 2006b; Papatheodorou 2006) nor the wider debates that occurred
within geography as to the significance of model building and the philosophy of
knowledge in which the TALC should be seen. Although these are significant issues as
a case can be argued that its relative lack of predictive capacity without an
understanding of its spatial dimension may mean that it does not function as a model
that can contribute to theory development in an orthodox sense. In fact, the TALC is
much more widely cited in tourism journals than it is in geography journals even though
it was originally published in the Canadian Geographer. Also of significance for the

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
11
present review is the wide range of applications and contexts in which the TALC has
been placed in the Butler volumes including authenticity, coastal resorts, economic
geography, entrepreneurship, heritage, island states, national parks, natural areas, resort
restructuring, retailing, rural areas, spatial interaction, sustainable tourism and urban
tourism. As, to an extent, they also reflect many of the major themes of geographical
research in tourism overall (see also Williams 1998; Shaw and Williams 2002; Hall and
Page 2006) and link to a longstanding interest of geographers on explaining and
describing why, how and where people move to engage in leisure, tourism and other
forms of voluntary movement.
One of the more interesting and theoretically informed developments in tourism has
been the engagement of geographers in the development of concepts of mobility (e.g.
Bell and Ward 2000; Frändberg and Vilhelmson 2003; Coles et al. 2004, 2005; Hall
2005b, 2005c; Coles and Hall 2006; Burns and Novelli 2008), which although often
associated with the work of sociologists such as Urry (2000), also has a substantial
spatial dimensions and academic legacy dating back to the 1950s (Hall 2005d). Indeed,
both the sociological and spatial traditions of mobility studies have drawn upon time
geography (Carlstein et al. 1978) as both method and inspiration (e.g. Baerenholdt et al.
2004). Time geography examines ‘the ways in which the production and reproduction
of social life depend upon knowledgeable human subjects tracing out routinized paths
over space and through time, fulfilling particular projects whose realizations are
bounded by inter-locking capability, coupling and steering constraints’ (Gregory1985:
297), and has been influential in the development of ideas of structuration (Giddens
1984) as well as in understanding travel and economic flows and patterns.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
12
The ‘mobile turn’ in sociology has been likened by Urry (2004) as the ‘new social
physics’. However, Hall (2005d) argued that in developing a new social physics that the
contributions of ‘old’ social physics should not be ignored (see Stewart 1950) and
suggesting that there were ways of integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches to
human mobility, as well as reiterating the suggestions of Coles et al. (2004, 2005) that
there was a need to develop a coherent approach to understanding the range of
mobilities undertaken by individuals, not just the category of tourists. From such a
position tourism and associated mobilities need to be understood over an individual’s
and co-decision-makers lifecourse as well as over the totality of a trip. ‘Without such an
approach… we are forever doomed to see tourism’s effects only at the destination scale
rather than as part of a broader understanding of mobility’ (Hall 2008: 15). Indeed, Hall
(2005d) argues that if the analogue with physics is to be maintained then macro-level
quantitative accounts of patterns of human mobility can be regarded as classical
Newtonian physics in which the description and prediction of travel flows and patterns
can be undertaken with a reasonable degree of certainty while micro-level accounts of
individual human behaviour can be likened to quantum physics in which far greater
uncertainty about the paths of individuals exist. Nevertheless, relationships clearly exist
between the different paradigms of physics as they do between individual and collective
tourism behaviour. The substantial contribution of tourism geographers to
understanding the spatial attributes of tourism (e.g. Lew and McKercher 2002, 2006;
McKercher and Lew 2003; McKercher and Lau 2007) may therefore serve to shed light
on the behaviours of individuals – and vice versa (Li 2000; Hall 2005b).
In the development of the ‘mobile turn’ in tourism geography strong links have also be
drawn to studies of diaspora (e.g. Duval 2003; Coles and Timothy 2004; Duval and Hall
2004) and migration (e.g. Kang and Page 2000; Williams and Hall 2000, 2002; Hall and

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
13
Williams 2002). Arguably the increased awareness of the interplay between tourism and
migration within the context of contemporary globalization, transnationalism and
mobility is one of the strongest theoretical and empirical contributions of tourism
geographers since the late 1990s. Shedding insights on labour migration (Aitken and
Hall 2000; Uriely 2001; Hardill 2004; Williams and Balaz 2004, 2005; Williams 2006,
2007), return migration (Duval 2002, 2003, 2004), retirement migration (King et al.
2000; Williams et al. 2000; Gustafson 2002), student migration (King and Ruiz-Gelices
2003), second homes (Müller 2002a, 2002b, 2002c, 2004, 2006; Müller and Hall 2003;
Hall and Müller 2004; McIntyre et al 2006; Visser 2006; Tuulentie 2007), and human
mobility over the lifecourse (Hall 2005b; Frändberg 2006). In addition, the empirical
research on mobility has been aided by developments in tracking technology and spatial
information systems that can provide a powerful analysis of patterns of individual
mobility (e.g. Shoval and Isaacson 2006, 2007a, 2007b; Lau and McKercher 2007) and
the associated impacts of visitor flows (e.g. Boers and Cottrell 2007; Connell and Page
2008). Although it should be noted that the connection between tourism and transport
studies is actually surprisingly weak in comparison to the vast amount of research
undertaken in transport geography with respect to human movement (e.g. Lumsdon and
Page 2004; Page 2005b; Duval 2007).
The interest in understanding tourism related patterns and flows have also been
extended to unraveling the complex international tourism system. Research on global
commodity chains (e.g. Mosedale 2006, 2008) has drawn on a number of sources and
influences within economic geography and political economy (e.g. see Britton 1991;
Agarwal et al. 2000; Hudson 2004; Hughes and Reimer 2004) as well as from social
theory and cultural geography (e.g. Jackson 1999; Ateljevic and Doorne 2003, 2004)
and has potential as a specific means of expanding tourism research on transnational

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
14
corporations and cross-border operations. The value of commodity chain analysis is that
it provides a more comprehensive account of production, distribution and consumption
than simply looking at tourism satellite accounts (TSA) (e.g. Smith 2004), tourism
competitive indices (e.g. Hall 2007a), distribution channels (e.g. Pearce et al. 2004) or
supply and value chains. Whereas distribution channel analysis for example evaluates
channel organization and operation for improved tourism marketing, commodity chain
analysis helps reveal the system of international tourism actions and the qualitative
change in process at each step of the chain (Mosedale 2008). Arguably, such approaches
have facilitated a far more nuanced understanding of global-local economic
relationships in tourism (Milne and Ateljevic 2001) than from focusing on TSAs,
distribution or value, as important as these might be in their own right. Indeed, Smith
(2007) points to the value of moving our understanding of tourism beyond the TSA
dimension by examining tourism as a tradable service from the perspective of the World
Trade Organisation which has a different way of defining and treating tourism in
contrast to other organisations like the UN-WTO, World Travel and Tourism Council or
the World Economic Forum (see also Coles and Hall 2008).
Research on international tourism flows has also led to greater connectivity between
tourism geography, international business and economic geography. This has included
attention to international trade in services, the relationships between labour mobility and
concepts of citizenship, internationalization of tourism businesses, and place marketing
and the experience economy (Richards and Wilson 2007a; Coles and Hall 2008). Hall
and Coles (2008) describing this confluence as being part of the ‘mobilities of
commerce’ in which tourism is embedded. However, they also noted that significant
disciplinary boundaries exist in seeking to gain an improved understanding of the
different modes of trade in international services, but that there was significant ‘natural

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
15
ground’ between International Business and Tourism studies, with geographers often
having connections to both disciplinary fields. Therefore, tourism geography in general
has the potential to expose some of the limitations of extant work on tourism
management in terms of (cross-border) location, the dominant use of economics-
influenced understanding of location and the firm, and a failure to examine the internal
workings and processes of business.
At the same time as links have been developing between economic geography and
tourism geography so too has there been greater interplay with cultural geography and
social theory (Cartier and Lew 2005; Minca and Oakes 2006). Arguably this work has
been most pronounced in the work of Aitchison (2001, 2005), who has provided some
significant gender perspectives on leisure and tourism geographies, as well as a broader
text on cultural geographies of tourism and leisure (Aitchison et al. 2000). Crang (1997)
and Crouch (1999, 2000) who have focused on everyday tourism and leisure practices,
such as visiting allotments or the translation of hobbies and interests into tourism-
related activities such as visiting gardens as visitor attractions (Connell 2004, 2005;
Connell and Meyer 2004) and their embodiment in tourism practices as well as the role
of visual culture in tourism (Crouch and Lübbren 2003; Page et al 2006). One
interesting development as also been the connection of social theory to an improved
understanding of hospitality and host-guest/local-non-local encounters as a form of
social practice (Barnett 2005; Bell 2007) which may provide a new relationship
between geographical studies and hospitality management. Nevertheless, the potential
of social theory and much contemporary cultural geography to more generally inform
tourism management, as opposed to the study of tourism per se, is an area that requires
greater investigation.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
16
Intersections between tourism and political geography and the broader political field has
taken several directions including issues of borders and political boundaries (e.g.
Church and Reid 2000; Timothy 2001, 2004; Prokkola 2007), governance and regional
institutions (Church et al. 2000; Timothy 2003; Church 2004), and a number of different
approaches to the central political issue of power, with the leading contribution perhaps
being a monograph edited by Church and Coles (2007) that demonstrates the connection
of a number of geographers working in tourism to the various theoretical approaches
towards power.
The critique of neoliberalism that has been a significant theme in human geography has
not been addressed to the same extent in tourism geography, although a number of
significant publications exist, especially in a development context (e.g. Desforges 2000;
Hannam 2002) as well as with respect to concepts of destination or place
competitiveness (Hall 2007a). Concepts of political ecology have also been utilized to
examine tourism and development processes in island destinations (Gössling 2003a,
2003b). However, while issues of politics and power have formed a significant
backdrop to resource management and policy and planning debates in tourism there has
perhaps not been as much overt critical connection between theoretically grounded
studies power and tourism planning as might be expected.
3. Tourism Planning and Places
Tourism planning, along with associated research on the impacts of tourism, has long
been a major applied contribution of geographers to the study of tourism (e.g. Murphy
1985). Recent years have witnessed not only new editions or at least versions of a
number of significant textbooks (e.g. Murphy and Murphy 2004; Hall 2008b) but also

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
17
the development of new fields of tourism planning which in themselves have been
influenced by theoretical developments in urban and regional planning (e.g. Healey
1997; Berke 2002) as well as by the business planning literature (e.g. Bramwell and
Lane 2000; Faulkner 2003). Long-standing planning debates, such as issues of
participation and community-based tourism (Blackstock 2005) and growth management
(Gill 2004), continue to be featured in the literature (Singh et al. 2003; Tosun and
Timothy 2003; Bramwell 2004; Tosun 2005; Dredge and Jenkins 2007) even if the
discourse at times utilizes that of business and focuses on ‘stakeholders’ and ‘visions’
rather than ‘public’ or ‘interests’ (Caffyn and Jobbins 2003; Smith 2003; Murphy and
Murphy 2004). Such a change in discourse is a reflection not only of the exchange of
different disciplinary languages as tourism geographers locate in business schools but is
also reflective of some of the multidisciplinary approaches that occurs within tourism
which often regard organizational and public interests as being one and the same thing
without adequate appreciation of issues of scale or relevance.
The mix of business and regional studies discourses can be seen, for example, in areas
such as knowledge management (Ruhanen and Cooper 2004), networks, clustering
(Michael 2007), competitiveness (Hall 2007a), and innovation (Hall and Williams
2008) as well as the wider field of tourism and entrepreneuership (Ateljevic and Page
2009). Much of tourism studies has tended to utilize rather narrow economic or business
approaches towards such subjects without adequately recognizing the conceptual
difficulties in transferring concepts from an organizational or commercial setting to a
spatial and social context (Hall 2007a). This is not to suggest that geographers cannot
contribute to understanding tourism businesses, rather it is to suggest that they tend to
emphasise the embeddedness of business and entrepreneurial behaviour in place and
context (Page et al. 1999; Getz and Carlsen 2000; Ioannides 2003; Getz and Nilsson

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
18
2004; Hall 2004; Hall and Rusher 2004; Getz and Petersen 2005; Rogerson 2004a,
2004b, 2004c, 2005) rather than see the firm or entrepreneur acting in isolation. Indeed
it can be argued that tourism geographers arguably take issues of business location and
the production of space far more seriously than business and management as they regard
location as far more than a mere factor if production with an economic value attached to
it (Connell and Page 2005).
In some instances, ongoing research studies of the same locale (e.g. Page and Thorn
1997; 2002) highlights the continuity in problems associated with sustainable tourism
planning where national tourism growth objectives may not be congruent with the
impacts this causes in spite of rhetoric associated with a sustainable tourism
development (however it is interpreted): here the key questions are sustainable for who?
and sustainable for the resource base or the economy? Similarly, geographers have also
contributed to a better understanding of the regional and spatial dimensions of tourism
labour markets and their policy and planning implications (e.g. Lundmark 2005, 2006;
Liu and Wall 2006; Chhetri et al. 2008). In fact several recent critiques of sustainable
tourism and the evolution of the field, particularly the contribution made by different
disciplines to this evolving field of study since the 1960s, highlights major contributions
made by geographers to this critical area of research (Saarinen 2006; Page and Connell
2008)
Urban tourism has been a focal point of geographical research since the 1980s
(Ashworth 1992; Law 1992; Page 1995), primarily as a result of economic restructuring
and change and associated place marketing, but also in connection to specific tourism
products such as hallmark events (Judd and Fainstein 1999; Ashworth and Tunbridge
2000; Pearce 2001; Richard 2001; Page and Hall 2003; Cartier and Lew 2005). More

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
19
recent research developments include particular attention to ethnic and heritage
precincts (e.g. Chang 2000; Timothy 2002), their gateway function (Page 2001) as well
as the continuing relationship of tourism to broader processes of urban change,
especially in the inner city or waterfront areas. One of the most significant
developments with respect to research on tourism’s role in urban development and place
marketing has been its role within the notion of creative industries, regions or cities
(Gibson and Connell 2003, 2005, 2007; Bayliss 2004, 2007), whereby creativity is
regarded as being an important element of place competitiveness and development
(Richard and Wilson 2006, 2007a, 2007b). However, the notion of creative cities and
industries and their capacities for innovation is by no means uncontested (e.g. Gibson
and Klocker 2004; Hall and Williams 2008). Indeed, within much of the literature on
regional studies and tourism, which views tourism as a form of regional development, it
has been described as a ‘low-road approach of serial reproduction rather than a ‘high
road’ approach that utilizes tourism as a means to an end in terms of accessibility,
enabling functions and quality of life (Malecki 2004; Hall 2007b; Hall and Williams
2008). In this respect tourism is the supporting infrastructure rather than the driver of
change in the local economic landscape, a feature which has led to the downshifting of
tourism as a principal architect of urban regeneration to one where mixed uses now
dominate the public sectors encouragement of cultural quarters and sectors in regional
regeneration.
The relationship between tourism and place change is clearly not isolated to urban
environments. Rural areas and the countryside have also long been an area of interest to
tourism geographers (Roberts and Hall 2001; D. Hall et al 2003, 2005), particular given
their role as an urban recreational hinterland and playground of many urbanites
(Patmore 1983), especially in National Parks (Connell and Page 2008; Frost and Hall

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
20
2009). Farm tourism continues to be an object of interest (e.g. Gössling and Mattson
2002) although this has also been developed into a more thorough examination of the
role of tourism in the development of new distribution channels such as farmers markets
and other forms of direct marketing, sometimes described as food and wine tourism (for
reviews of this field see Hjalager and Richards 2002; Mitchell and Hall 2006; Hall and
Mitchell 2008; Hall and Sharples 2008). However, the development of the post-
productivist countryside in some developed countries also provides opportunities for the
study of tourism and rurality as well as conflict between different rural users. The role
of second homes in the countryside has been a significant theme addressed by
geographers (Hall and Müller 2004) with several publications noting the extent to which
a myth of displacement exists (Marjavaara 2007a, 2007b) as well as myths of rurality
(Pitkänen 2008).
Several geographers have also addressed issues of coastal and marine tourism, some
from a protected area or ecotourism slant (e.g. Garrod and Wilson 2003, 2004; Cater
and Cater 2007) and conflict over resources (Funck 2006), while others have been
interested in the position of tourism within coastal management strategies and resort
development (e.g. Coles and Shaw 2006; Agarwal and Shaw 2007). Another significant
area of research has been the impact of tourism on charismatic marine megafauna such
as whales and dolphins (e.g. Orams 2002, 2005), while Preston-Whyte (2002, 2004) has
investigated the liminal spaces of the beach from his Durban waterfront.
Issues of peripherality (see Page 1994 for a review of the concept’s application in
tourism), and the role of tourism as a potential mechanism for economic development in
such regions, has been a significant focus for many European geographers with there
being a significant overlap with rural geography and rural studies as well as nature-

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
21
based tourism research (Saarinen 2003, 2004; Saarinen and Hall 2004), especially with
respect to wilderness areas and national parks (e.g. Saethorsdottir 2004; Saarinen 2005;
Mose 2007) and resource management and interpretation (e.g. Ham and Weiler 2004,
2007). Because of their own location and national interests Nordic geographers in
particular have made a very strong contribution to this field (Müller and Jansson 2007),
while both Nordic and other geographers in ‘new world’ countries have also written
substantially on the relationship between tourism and indigenous peoples in peripheral
areas (e.g. Pettersson 2003; Tuulentie 2006; Viken and Müller 2006; Butler and Hinch
2007). Such research is important as studies of tourism in peripheral regions in the
developed world can often be linked to the contingent marginality of many developing
country tourism locations (Hall 2007c).
4. Development and its discontents
Development studies, whether regional or thematic, has been an area of interest for
tourism geographers for many years (e.g. Scheyvens 2002; Telfer 2002; d’Hauteserre
2003) and many of the seminal studies can be dated to the late 1960s and early 1970s.
Several notable regional studies have been produced (e.g. Williams and Balaz 2000;
Duval 2004b; Rogerson and Visser 2004; Aarlt 2006) although one of the more notable
thematic developments has been the focus on tourism-poverty relationships often
described under the term of ‘pro poor tourism’ (PPT) (Torres and Momsen 2004; Hall
2007b), and particularly in the post-apartheid context of southern Africa (e.g. Binns and
Nel 2002; Kirsten and Rogerson 2002; Nel and Binns 2002; Rogerson 2002a, 2002b,
2002c, 2003a, 2003b, 2004a, 2005, 2006; Visser 2003; Ndlovu and Rogerson 2003;
Gössling et al. 2004; Kaplan 2004; Visser & Rogerson 2004). Indeed, Rogerson (2006:
55) suggests that South Africa ‘is a laboratory for the testing and evolution of new

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
22
approaches towards tourism and the planning of local economic development’. The
perceived value of this relationship has been stimulated in great part by the policies of
development institutions such as the World Bank as well as the UNWTO – what is often
referred to as ‘poverty consensus’ (Mowforth and Munt 2003; Scheyvens 2007).
As Scheyvens (2007) emphasized in her analysis of the field, academic perspectives on
the relationship between poverty and tourism have varied widely since the 1950s. While
in the 1950s tourism was identified as a specialization strategy that could help newly-
independent developing countries earn foreign exchange, in the 1970s and 1980s many
social scientists argued that poor people in non-Western countries were typically
excluded from or disadvantaged by international tourism development. This is not to
deny the importance of reducing poverty, rather because many approaches to pro-poor
tourism tend to overlook significant environmental, social and political issues: ‘the pro-
poor development paradigm . . . is considerably circumscribed in its premise of
economic growth as the foundation of development’ (Mowforth and Munt, 2003: 34).
A conclusion also reached in broader analysis of the ‘poverty consensus’ (Storey et al.
2005).
The embracing of pro-poor tourism by some academics and consultants has also drawn
comparisons with the uncritical enthusiasm of some for ecotourism (Butcher 2007). In
the South African context Brennan and Allen (2001: 219) contended that ecotourism
was ‘essentially an ideal, promoted by well-fed whites’. As Scheyvens (2007: 232)
asked, ‘Could the same be said of PPT, or is it likely to deliver genuine, wide-ranging
benefits to the poor?’ Indeed, Scheyvens own work highlights the importance of
connecting poverty alleviation approaches to broader issues of empowerment and the

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
23
role of place in development processes (e.g. Scheyvens 2002, 2005) in order for pro-
poor approaches to succeed.
Many of the issues raised in the pro-poor tourism debate have also been extended by
geographers to the developed countries as well particularly with respect to broader
discussions of welfare (e.g. D. Hall and Brown 2006) and ethics (Duffy and Smith
2003; Fennell 2006a, 2006b; Fennell and Malloy 2007). However, they also have their
intellectual origins in the development of concepts of sustainability, alternative tourism
and ecotourism (Saarinen 2006). Although the initial promise of such concepts has
arguably not been met given that sustainability has remained a focal point for much
geographical research (e.g. Butler 1999; Aronsson 2000; Hall and Richards 2003; Teo
2003; Saarinen 2006; Weaver 2006), although with new focus on issues such as
ecolabelling (Reiser and Simmons 2005; Gössling 2006) and ecological footprint
analysis (Gössling et al. 2002). However, arguably one of the most significant
developments, and one that provides interesting links between human and physical
geography is that of climate and global environmental change
The relationship between climate and tourism has long been a significant research
theme that bridges human and physical geographical interests (e.g. Mieczkowski 1985;
Harlfinger 1991; Gomez-Martín 2005). Given improved datasets and methodological
improvements a new generation of climate and tourism indices (de Freitas et al. 2004)
as well as evaluations of tourism demand in relation to climatic factors have been
developed (Gomez-Martín 2004, 2006). However, increasingly the focus of the
relationships between climate and tourism and recreation has shifted to be primarily
related to climate change (Scott, McBoyle and Schwartzentruber 2004), and often with
respect to specific at-risk environments, such as alpine (Scott 2006), polar areas

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
24
(Johnston 2006) and wetlands (Wall 1998), or climate related attractions and activities,
such as skiing (e.g. König 1999; Scott, McBoyle and Mills 2003; Bicknell and
McManus 2006; Scott, McBoyle and Minogue 2007) or nature-based tourism (e.g.
Scott, Jones and Konopek 2007). Nevertheless, substantial uncertainty surrounds the
long term implications of climate change for tourism flows, patterns and destinations
(Gössling and Hall 2006a), especially given the capacity of industry, markets and
destinations to adapt to new conditions in both generating areas and in destination areas
(Gössling et al. 2006; Hall 2006d; Saarinen and Tervo 2006; Simpson et al. 2008).
Although economics has often been a focal point of public attention on climate change
(e.g. Stern 2006), geographers have historically played a major role in examining the
interrelationships between tourism and climate change (Scott, Jones and McBoyle 2005;
Scott, Wall and McBoyle 2005), both as individuals and disciplinary-based research
teams or as part of multidisciplinary research programmes (e.g. Sievanen et al. 2005;
Peeters 2007). Indeed, geographers have often tried to expand the framework of concern
by emphasizing the extent to which climate is only one, albeit highly significant,
dimension of global environmental change (GEC) (Gössling 2002; Gössling and Hall
2006b).
Human impacts on the environment can have a global dimension in two ways. First,
‘global refers to the spatial scale or functioning of a system’ (Turner et al. 1990: 15).
Here, the climate and the oceans have the characteristic of a global system and both
influence and are influenced by tourism production and consumption. A second kind of
GEC occurs if a change, ‘occurs on a worldwide scale, or represents a significant
fraction of the total environmental phenomenon or global resource’ (Turner et al. 1990:
15-16). Tourism is significant for both types of GEC.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
25
In addition to climate change, five other major aspects of tourism and leisure-related
alteration of the environment at a global scale are usually identified: (1) the change of
land cover and land use as a result of tourism developments, particularly tourism related
urbanisation (2) the use of energy and its associated impacts, especially in relation to
transport (e.g. Gössling 2000; Peeters, Szimba and Duijnisveld 2007) (3) the exchange
of biota over geographical barriers and the loss of biodiversity and extinction of wild
species (Hall 2005e, 2006c), (4) the exchange and dispersal of diseases (Rodway-Dyer
and Shaw 2005), and (5), demands, on sometime scarce, water supplies (Gössling
2001). However, as review publications by Gössling (2002) and Gössling and Hall
(2006c) indicated, research on these significant topics shows considerable variability in
coverage, methodology and quality.
Finally we should note that such stress factors on the global and local environment are
regarded not just as an environmental problem but also one that affects security. In their
review of tourism crisis, safety and security. Hall, Timothy and Duval (2004) suggested
that our understandings of security in tourism needed to expand beyond political
security issues such as terrorism (Hall 2002) to embrace broader understandings of how
tourism is implicated in changes in the global economic, social, political and
environmental system as well as how to manage and solve such change. Yet in spite of
these valid contributions to the development of tourism knowledge by geographers,
within the discipline of geography, a number of tensions exist in relation to the
development of such subject specialization, many of which are incumbent upon the
perception that tourism studies is an applied and vocational area and not a mainstream
area of study that is theoretically valid to pursue. For this reason, it is pertinent to
consider some of these debates as they have dominated geography since the 1970s may

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
26
contribute to the peripheralisation of the sub-discipline as well as within tourism
geographies itself. Indeed much of the debate hinges upon the increasing recognition
that knowledge and knowledge management (Shaw and Williams 2008) remains a key
area in tourism studies.
5. Tourism as an ‘Applied’ Area of Research: Problems for the Discipline or a
Valid Contribution to Society?
In geography, basic research aims to develop new theory and methods that help explain
the processes through which the spatial dimensions of physical and/or human
environments evolve. In contrast, applied research uses existing geographic theory or
techniques to understand and solve specific empirical problems (Hall and Page 2006).
Whilst some critics of this categorisation point to the lack of validity in differentiating
between the rationale of research and its intended use, there is a widely accepted
premise within academic geography (see Johnston 2000 for more detail) that there are
clear divisions between pure and applied research. This debate is particularly relevant
for tourism given the commercial focus of the subject matter and the debates aired
earlier on the lack of embeddedness between the spatial focus of geographical research
and the business and commercial practices of tourism. Pacione (1999) also developed
the argument of ‘useful knowledge’ which also raises the inevitable criticisms of what
might be non-useful geographical knowledge and useful for whom? However, in
practice, this dichotomy between pure and applied knowledge has been and remains
extensively laboured, particularly to question the academic value of applied research.
As Johnston (2000: 696) observed, ‘Workers in the various fragments [of Geography]
seek to establish their relevance in very different ways, which occasionally stimulates

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
27
debates over what should be privileged in disciplinary promotional activities: for too
long, the concept of relevance has been narrowly construed’.
Yet the debate of applied versus theoretical knowledge has now been elevated beyond
the level of geography as discipline and is becoming significant for tourism as a whole
(Ruhanen and Cooper 2004; Shaw and Williams 2008) as many universities embrace
government objectives and funding for increasing knowledge transfer as part of the
knowledge management agenda to improve the skill base and research available to the
wider economy. Perhaps, as Harvey (1984:7) commented, ‘geography is far too
important to be left to generals, politicians and corporate chiefs. Notions of applied and
relevant geography pose questions of objectives and interests served…. There is more to
geography than the production of knowledge’. By engaging with the public and private
organizations outside of the academy, applied geography has a contribution to make to
society, even if there are questions about the values and objectives of applied research
and its potential uses. Examples of such applied research are as diverse as tour guiding
(Black and Weiler 2005), crime (Barker and Page 2002; Walker and Page 2007), crisis
management for avian influenza and pandemic flu (Page et al. 2006), distribution
channels (Pearce and Schott 2005; Stuart et al. 2005), second homes (Müller and Hall
2003) and disability (Shaw and Coles 2004; Shaw et al. 2005; Packer et al. 2007).
Indeed many consultancy or ‘third stream’ research projects, also referred to as mode 2
knowledge (Gibbons et al. 1994; Coles et al. 2006) (in comparison with mode 1
knowledge that originates within centres of higher education) have resulted in often
highly-cited academic outputs in addition to the reports required by the sponsoring
organization.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
28
One recent area of useful development for applied geographical research has been in the
use of GIS. GIS, developed by advances in computer hardware and software (such as
ArcInfo), incorporates more sophisticated systems to search, query, present and analyse
data in a spatial context. This enables geographers to assist decision-makers in making
planning decisions. Butler (1992) outlined some of the possible problem-solving roles
of GIS in tourism as did Elliott-White and Finn (1998) but the utilisation has been
dependent upon the skill-base of the geographer and often securing industry or research
council funding in order to collect the large amounts of data to meet the requirements of
creating a representative sample to derive meaningful results from the GIS-related
mapping outputs (e.g., Forer 2002; Becken, Vuletich and Campbell 2007). Interestingly,
this represents a major opportunity area for those more applied tourism researchers to
try and understand probably the most problematic area of tourism research: how the
dynamic of time is built into models of tourist activity so that the interactions of time,
space and tourist activity can be more properly understood so that the finite resource
base which visitors utilise can be managed in relation to the timing of demand and the
availability of supply (e.g. Shoval and Isaacson 2007a; Boers and Cottrell 2007; Chhetri
and Arrowsmith 2008; Connell and Page 2008). Whilst the tourism industry has been
adept at developing research tools to understand the spatially-contingent demand for
tourism products by using yield management epitomised by the low-cost airlines at a
macro or destination level, it is the micro level impacts of tourism within and at
destinations that will continue to offer fruitful research agendas for tourism geographers
for the foreseeable future. However, there is a danger that many of the spatially-
analytical tools of the geographer will be usurped by other applied researchers such as
economists who are showing interest in GIS as a tool to assist them in bringing a greater
realism into the demand for more spatially contingent models of the impact of tourism,
which whilst in their infancy, will only grow through time. The continued relevance of

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
29
applied geography based on external funding reflects that “the basic tenets of Mode 2
may have increasing relevance to tourism studies within higher education in a manner
that, as yet, has not been identified” (Coles et al. 2006: 300), but which appear to have
substantial potential value for problem-focussed post-disciplinary approaches in
tourism, especially such cross-disciplinary problems as climate and global
environmental change. Similarly, Hellström et al. (2003: 251–2) note that although
disciplinarity and paradigmatic policing within disciplines has traditionally guided
researchers towards particular problems, new modes of knowledge production are
necessary that challenge, ‘received understandings of disciplinarity (for instance, a
hardcore of interrelated common concepts and questions that guide problem choice
together with a corresponding social organisation)’.
6. The Future
Any review of the contribution of a discipline to the study of tourism is usually
characterized by a combination of continuity and change: indeed these are the basic
tenets underpinning the geographer’s analysis of tourism and are pertinent to the
analysis of the wider development of the field over the last decade or so. This review
has been necessarily limited in scale and scope due to the space available, but it does
seek to illustrate the change, evolution and new directions which tourism geographers
have engaged as well as debates within the subject area. Previous reviews of
geographical studies of tourism (e.g. Butler 2004) have noted that while the fields of
tourism and recreation studies remain outside much mainstream academic geography,
geographers have made considerable contributions to the understanding of tourism and
recreation phenomena even if treated as different ends of the same spectrum - our
leisure lives and the way we use the free time we have. To an extent several of the

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
30
geographies of tourism, and particularly those dealing more directly with tourism
management issues, exist outside the corpus of whatever one might describe as
mainstream geographies. While institutionally, tourism geography would appear to be
in reasonable health, there are a number of challenges with respect to cross-disciplinary
mobility that affect the discipline as a whole and the sub-discipline in particular as well
as the impact of research assessments (Coles et al. 2006). Nevertheless, a number of key
areas of development emerge, particularly with respect to the spatialities of mobility and
global environmental change. The latter continuing the ‘impact’ tradition in tourism
studies but reflecting a far more sophisticated account of change at various scales than
previously appreciated.
Several of the issues identified in this review are likely to continue and if not intensify
in the immediate future particularly in an environment in which governments are often
providing more direction in terms of research areas they will fund and courses they will
support. A key issue will clearly continue to be the tension between ‘applied’ and
‘theoretical’ research, particularly given the increasing pressure being applied to public
universities with respect to developing closer relationships with business and attracting
more ‘third stream’ funding. This is occurring not only within geography but is also a
significant issue in other academic areas such as business schools and environmental
studies where geographers are employed and is arguably part of broader issues
surrounding the role of universities and their research in contemporary society.
However, for a field such as tourism geography the pressures to conduct industry related
research are likely to be substantial given the interpretation of some tourism academics
that their role is to undertake research for the tourism industry rather than of the
industry.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
31
Another tension exists between the disciplinary drives inherent in research assessment
exercises (via the subject scope given to panels) and the increasingly multiple
disciplinary nature of the academic units within which geographers are located. For
example, in Australia and New Zealand universities as of the beginning of 2008 there
are now only two departments of geography remaining as separate units. All other
departments have been combined with environmental studies or sciences, anthropology,
development studies, natural resource management, planning or geology. Similar
pressures exist in Europe and North America as university administrations seek greater
management efficiencies. Such structural change may well have long-term effects on
the skill mix sought by such departments. The multidisciplinary nature of many tourism
departments, especially in business schools, may also downplay spatial skills, with only
Nordic business schools tending to have departments, sections of or strong linkages to
economic and social geography as part of their academic structures. Add to this the
debates in universities over the critical mass necessary for a discipline to function
academically (and financially), then geography per se is more inclined to give way to
more multidisciplinary groupings.
Therefore, it is not surprising to find that much of the mobility and migration of
spatially-trained geographers to business school settings has been accompanied by a
growth in the subject of tourism studies outside of the normal boundaries of what was
identified institutionally as geography. Ironically at a time when geography has seen
challenges to its position as a subject, there has been a relative failure to embrace an
opportunity available to grow its significant role in academic portfolios of universities.
The perceptions of geography departments in the 1980s and 1990s of tourism as a
vocational and applied area devoid of theory and scholarly pursuits are a misnomer as
this review indicates. Geographers have provided one of the principal subjects and

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
32
several of the pillars supporting the intellectual development of tourism since the 1970s,
but especially in the boom years of the 1980s and 1990s, reflected in the research
outputs reviewed here.
The loss of spatiality in some areas is interestingly matched by its adoption by others.
As noted above, the ‘mobile turn’ in sociology has been substantially influenced by
time geography while spatial systems approaches such as GIS now often have their own
departments or units separate to that of a geography department. Indeed, it could be
argued that there is increased convergence between some areas of tourism geography
and the sociology and anthropology of tourism as well as cultural and post-colonial
studies. Although, in contrast, the increasingly substantial contribution of geographers
to understanding tourism’s role in regional development, entrepreneurship and
innovation is arguably still retaining a strong emphasis on place and space.
Tourism geography is therefore caught within some of the broader tensions that exist
within the field of tourism studies as a whole with respect to the reasons why not only
research is conducted but also that the academic institution of tourism exists at all
(Coles and Hall 2006; Hall and Page 2006). We can conclude that a shift has occurred
from Pearce’s (1979) geography of tourism to geographies of tourism but with an
important caveat: that the definition of what constitutes the geographical focus of
tourism has been expanded substantially with the wider contributions from other social
science subjects, especially sociology and cultural studies.
The geography of tourism is therefore at a crossroads. On the one hand a number of the
research areas exist within the subject which depict it at its strongest such as human
mobility, crisis management, conservation and biosecurity, destination planning and

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
33
management, regional development, international business, poverty reduction and pro-
poor tourism, and global environmental change. These are all regarded as key issues for
the future of international tourism management in the next five to ten years and should
be seen as impetus for the field. Although a number of these are external to tourist
firms it should also be noted that geographers have also made very significant
contributions to understanding tourism entrepreneurship, innovation, distribution
channels, and tourism related international trade and business. Indeed, it is likely that
this research will remain a significant focus for geographers, particularly those based in
business schools, in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, geography is also facing
increasing institutional challenges for its long-term survival, especially with respect to a
separate identity and skill base. Even though it is a field which has been a major
contributor to the sustainability of tourism its own long term sustainability is becoming
increasingly problematic. Much of the future role of geographer’s research on tourism
in universities, society and in the wider policy-making environment will depend upon
their ability to foster and adapt to the new research agendas which will bring tourism
into the public domain, particularly with respect to conservation and environmental
change. For example, debates over the desirability of long-haul travel and our tourism
carbon footprint on society (e.g. Gössling and Hall 2006a, c; Hunter and Shaw 2007;
Scott et al. 2007; Simpson et al. 2008) as well as growing concerns over social inclusion
and exclusion debates in the developed and developing world associated with how
tourism can create artificial social divides and exacerbate notions of poverty (Hall and
Brown 2006; Aitchison 2007; Hall 2007b).
Whilst geographers will clearly not have a monopoly on the way tourism develops as a
subject in the next 5 to 10 years, their continued role is vital, so that the subject
embraces many of the contemporary debates and research agendas facing tourism not

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
34
only at the level of the firm and its economic concerns but some of the broader social
and environmental challenges. Tourism and the communities that depend on it clearly
face an uncertain future given the issues of global security, environmental change and
energy supply. Yet with the growing blurring of the boundaries of the social science
subjects that now contribute to the study of tourism and the potential homogenisation of
disciplinary space in the short-term and skills in the longer, it is perhaps pertinent to
conclude with a reconfiguration of Cohen’s (1974) ‘who is a tourist?’ to ‘who is a
tourism geographer?’ The conceptual clarification of both tourism and tourism
geography remains an important ongoing task, not just because it influences how we
think, but perhaps far more significantly, what we actually do now, given the broader
development of spatiality in tourism research.
7. References
Agarwal, S., Ball, R., Shaw, G., & Williams, A. (2000). The geography of tourism
production: uneven disciplinary development? Tourism Geographies, 2(3), 241-263.
Aitchison, C.C. (2001). Theorizing other discourses of tourism, gender and culture: Can
the subaltern speak (in tourism)? Tourist Studies, 1, 133-147.
Aitchison, C.C. (2005). Feminist and gender research in sport and leisure management:
Understanding the social-cultural nexus of gender-power relations. Leisure Studies, 19,
422-441.
Aitchison, C.C. (2007). Marking difference or making a difference: Constructing places,
policies and knowledge of inclusion, exclusion and social justice in leisure, sport and
tourism. In I. Ateljevic, N. Morgan and A. Pritchard (Eds.), The Critical Turn in
Tourism Studies: Innovative Research Methodologies (pp.77-90). Oxford: Elsevier.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
35
Aitchison, C., Macleod, N, & Shaw, S. (2000). Leisure and tourism landscapes: Social
and cultural geographies. London: Routledge.
Aitken, C., & Hall, C.M. (2000). Migrant and foreign skills and their relevance to the
tourism industry. Tourism Geographies, 2(3), 66-86.
Agarwal, S., & Shaw, G. (Eds.) (2007). Managing coastal tourism resorts: A global
perspective. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Arlt, W. (2006). China’s outbound tourism. London: Routledge.
Aronsson, L. (2000). The development of sustainable tourism. London: Continuum.
Ashworth, G.J. (1992). Is there an urban tourism?, Tourism Recreation Research, 17(2),
3–8.
Ashworth, G.J., & Tunbridge, J. (2000). The tourist-historic city: Retrospect and
prospect of managing the heritage city. Oxford: Pergamon.
Ateljevic, I., & Doorne, S. (2003). Culture, economy and tourism commodities: Social
relations of production and consumption. Tourist Studies, 3(2), 123-41.
Ateljevic, I., & Doorne, S. (2004) Cultural circuits of tourism: Commodities, place, and
re-consumption. In A.A. Lew, C.M. Hall, & A.M. Williams (Eds.), A companion to
tourism. (pp.291-302). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing.
Baerenholdt, J.O., Haldrup, M., Larsen, J., & Urry, J. (2004). Performing tourist places.
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Ateljevic, J. and Page, S. J. (eds) (2009) Tourism and Entreneurship: International
Perspectives. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Barker, M. and Page, S. J. (2002). Visitor safety in urban tourism environments: the
case of Auckland, New Zealand. Cities, 19(4), 273-282.
Barnett, C. (2005). Ways of relating: Hospitality and the acknowledgment of otherness.
Progress in Human Geography, 29(1), 5-21.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
36
Bayliss, D. (2004). Denmark’s creative potential: The role of culture within Danish
urban development strategies. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 10, 5-28.
Bayliss, D. (2007). The rise of the creative city: Culture and creativity in Copenhagen.
European Planning Studies, 15(7), 889-903.
Becken, S., Vuletich, S. and Campbell, S. (2007). Developing a GIS-supported tourist
flow model for New Zealand, in D. Airey and J. Tribe (eds) Progress in Tourism
Research (pp. 107-122). Oxford: Elsevier.
Bell, D. (2007). The hospitable city: social relations in commercial spaces. Progress in
Human Geography 31(1), 7-22.
Bell, M., & Ward, G. (2000). Comparing temporary mobility with permanent migration.
Tourism Geographies, 2(3), 87-107.
Berke, P.R. (2002). Does sustainable development offer a new direction for planning?
Challenges for the 21st century. Journal of Planning Literature, 17(1), 21-36.
Bicknell, S., & McManus, P. (2006). The canary in the coalmine: Australian ski resorts
and their response to climate change. Geographical Research, 44(4), 386-400.
Blackstock, K. (2005) A critical look at community based tourism. Community
Development Journal, 40(1), 39-49.
Binns, T., & Nel, E. (2002). Tourism as a local development strategy in South Africa.
The Geographical Journal, 168(3), 235-247.
Black, R., & Weiler, B. (2005). Quality assurance and regulatory mechanisms in the
tour guiding industry: A systematic review. Journal of Tourism studies, 16(1), 24-37.
Boniface, B.G., & Cooper, C. (2005) Worldwide destinations: The geography of travel
and tourism (4th ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Boers, B., & Cottrell, S. (2007). Sustainable tourism infrastructure planning: A GIS-
supported approach, Tourism Geographies 9(1), 1-21.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
37
Bramwell, B. (2004) Partnerships, participation, and social science research in tourism
planning. In A. Lew, C.M. Hall, & A. Williams (Eds.), Companion to tourism (pp.541-
554), Oxford: Blackwell.
Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (Eds.) (2000). Tourism collaboration and partnerships:
Politics, practice and sustainability. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Brennan, F., & Allen, G. (2001). Community-based ecotourism, social exclusion and
the changing political economy of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. In D. Harrison (Ed.),
Tourism and the less developed world: Issues and case studies (pp. 203-221). New
York: CABI Publishing.
Britton, S.G. (1991). Tourism, capital, and place: Towards a critical geography of
tourism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 9(4), 451-78.
Burns, P., & M. Novelli (Eds.) (2008). Tourism and mobilities. Wallingford: CABI.
Butcher, J. (2007). Ecotourism, NGOs and development: A critical analysis. London:
Routledge.
Butler, R.W. (1980). The concept of the tourist area life-cycle of evolution: implications
for management of resources. The Canadian Geographer, 24 (1), 5-12.
Butler, R.W. (1992). Alternative tourism: The thin edge of the wedge. In V.L. Smith
and W.R. Eadington (eds) Tourism alternatives: Potentials and problems in the
development of tourism (pp.302-221), Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Butler, R.W. (1999). Sustainable tourism: A state-of-the-art review. Tourism
Geographies, 1(1), 7-25.
Butler, R.W. (2004). Geographical research on tourism, recreation and leisure: origins,
eras and directions. Tourism Geographies, 6(2), 143-62.
Butler, R.W. (Ed.) (2006a). The tourism life cycle. Vol.1, Applications and
modifications. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
38
Butler, R.W. (Ed.) (2006b). The tourism life cycle, Vol.2, Conceptual and theoretical
issues. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Butler, R.W., & Hinch, T. (Eds.) (2007). Tourism and indigenous peoples: Issues and
implications. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Caffyn, A., & Jobbins, G. (2003). Governance capacity and stakeholder interactions in
the development and management of coastal tourism: Examples from Morocco and
Tunisia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(2&3), 224-245.
Carlstein, T., Parkes, D.N., & Thrift, N.J. (Eds.) (1978). Timing space and spacing time.
London: Edward Arnold.
Cartier, C., & Lew, A. (Eds.) (2005). Seductions of place: Geographies of touristed
landscapes. New York: Routledge.
Cater, C., & Cater, E. (2007). Marine ecotourism: Between the devil and the deep blue
sea. Wallingford: CABI.
Chang, T. C. (2000). Singapore’s Little India: A tourist attraction in a contested
landscape. Urban Studies, 37(2), 343–66.
Chhetri, P., & Arrowsmith, C. (2008). GIS-based modelling of recreational potential of
nature-based tourism destinations. Tourism Geographies, 10(2), 233-257.
Chhetri, P., Corcoran, J., & Hall, C.M. (2008). Modelling the patterns and drivers of
tourism related employment for south-east Queensland – A spatial econometric
approach. Tourism Recreation Research, 33(1), 25-38.
Church, A. (2004). Local and regional tourism policy and power. In A. Lew, C.M. Hall,
& A. Williams (Eds.) Companion to tourism (pp.541-555), Oxford: Blackwell.
Church, A., Ball, R., Bull, C., & Tyler, D. (2000). Public policy engagement with
British tourism: The national, local and the European Union. Tourism Geographies,
2(3), 312-36.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
39
Church, A., & Coles, T.E. (Eds.) (2007). Tourism, power and space. London:
Routledge.
Church, A., & Reid, P. (2000). Urban power, international networks, and competition:
the example of cross-border co-operation. Urban Studies, 33(8), 1297-318.
Cohen, E. (1974). Who is a tourist? A conceptual clarification. Sociological Review, 22,
527–55.
Coles, T. (2006). Enigma variations? The TALC, marketing models and the descendants
of the product life cycle. In R. Butler (Ed.), The Tourism Life Cycle: Conceptual and
theoretical issues (pp. 49-66). Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Coles, T., Duval, D., & Hall, C.M. (2004). Tourism, mobility and global communities:
New approaches to theorising tourism and tourist spaces. In W. Theobold (Ed.), Global
tourism (3rd ed.) (pp. 463-481). Oxford: Heinemann.
Coles, T., & Hall, C.M. (2006). The geography of tourism is dead. Long live
geographies of tourism and mobility. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4-5), 289-292.
Coles, T., & Hall C.M. (eds) (2008). International business and tourism : Global issues,
contemporary interactions. London: Routledge,
Coles, T., Hall, C.M., & Duval, D. (2005). Mobilising tourism: a post-disciplinary
critique. Tourism Recreation Research, 30(2), 31–41.
Coles, T., Hall, C.M., & Duval, D.T. (2006). Tourism and post-disciplinary enquiry.
Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4), 293-319.
Coles, T., & Shaw, G. (2006). Tourism, property and the management of changes in
coastal resorts: Perspectives from South West England. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(1),
46-68.
Coles, T.E., & Timothy, D.J. (Eds.) (2004). Tourism, diasporas and space. London:
Routledge.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
40
Connell, J. (2004) The purest of human pleasures: the characteristics and motivations of
garden visitors in Great Britain. Tourism Management, 25(2), 229-247.
Connell, J. (2005) Managing gardens for visitors in Great Britain: a story of continuity
and change. Tourism Management 26 (2), 185-201.
Connell, J., & Meyer, D (2004) Modelling the visitor experience in the gardens of Great
Britain. Current Issues in Tourism, 7(3), 183-216.
Connell, J., & Page, S. J. (2005) Evaluating the economic and spatial effects of an
event: The case of the World Medical and Health Games. Tourism Geographies, 7(1),
63-85.
Connell, J., & Page, S.J. (2008). Exploring the spatial patterns of car-based tourist travel
in Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park, Scotland, Tourism Management, 29(3),
561-580.
Crouch, D. (ed.) (1999) Leisure/tourism geographies: Practices and geographical
knowledge. London: Routledge.
Crouch, D. (2000) Places around us: Embodied lay geographies in leisure and tourism.
Leisure Studies, 19(2), 63–76.
Crouch, D., & Lübbren, N. (eds) (2003). Visual culture and tourism. Berg: Oxford.
Davidoff, P.G., Davidoff, D.S., & Eyre, J.D. (2002). Tourism geography (2nd ed.).
Englewood-Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
de Freitas, C. R., Scott, D., & McBoyle, G. (2004). A new generation climate index for
tourism and recreation. In A. Matzarakis, C.R. de Freitas &. D. Scott (Eds.), Advances
in tourism climatology (pp. 19-27). Freiburg: Berichte des Meteorologischen Institutes
der Universität Freiburg.
Desforges, L. (2000). State tourism institutions and neo-liberal development: A case
study of Peru. Tourism Geographies, 2(2), 177-192.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
41
d’Hauteserre, A. (2003). A response to ‘Misguided policy initiatives in small-island
destinations: Why do up-market tourism policies fail?’ by D. Ioannides, & B. Holcomb.
Tourism Geographies, 5(1), 49-53.
Dredge, D., & Jenkins, J. (Eds.) (2007). Tourism planning and policy. Brisbane: Wiley.
Duffy, R., & Smith, M. (2003). The Ethics of tourism development. London: Routledge.
Duval, D.T. (2002). The return visit – return migration connection. In C.M. Hall, &
Williams, A. (Eds.), Tourism and migration: New relationships between production and
consumption (pp.257-276). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Duval, D.T. (2003). When hosts become guests: Return visits and diasporic identities in
a Commonwealth Eastern Caribbean community. Current Issues in Tourism, 6(4), 267-
308.
Duval, D.T. (2004a). Conceptualising return visits: a transnational perspective. In T.E.
Coles & D.J Timothy (Eds). Tourism, diasporas and space: Travels to promised
Lands (pp. 50-61). London: Routledge.
Crang, M. (1997). Picturing practices: research through the tourist gaze. Progress in
Human Geography, 21, 359–74.
Duval, D.T. (Ed.) (2004b). Tourism in the Caribbean: Trends, development, prospects.
London: Routledge.
Duval, D. (2007). Tourism and transport. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Duval, D.T., & Hall, C.M. (2004). Linking diasporas and tourism: transnational
mobilities of Pacific Islanders resident in New Zealand. In T.E. Coles, & D.J. Timothy
(Eds.) Tourism, Diasporas and Space (pp. 78-94). London: Routledge, London.
Elliot-White and Finn (1998).
Faulkner, B. (2003). Rejuvenating a maturing destination: The case of the Gold
Coast. In L. Fredline, L. Jago, & C. Cooper (Eds.), Progressing tourism research: Bill
Faulkner (pp. 34-86). Clevedon: Channel View Publications.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
42
Forer, P.C. (2002). Serial experiences: Monitoring, modelling and visualising the free
independent traveller in New Zealand at multiple scales with GIS. In A. Arnberger, C.
Brandenberg, & A. Muhar (Eds.) Monitoring and management of visitor flows in
recreational and protected areas (pp. 173-180). Vienna: Institute of Landscape
Architecture and Landscape Management, Bodenkultur University.
Franklin, A., & Crang, M. (2001). The trouble with tourism and travel theory? Tourist
Studies, 1(1), 5–22.
Fennell, D.A. (2006a). Tourism Ethics. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Fennell, D.A. (2006b). Evolution in tourism: The theory of reciprocal altruism and
tourist host interaction. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(2), 105-124.
Fennell, D.A., & Malloy, D.C. (2007). Codes of Ethics in Tourism: Practice, Theory,
Synthesis. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Frändberg, L. (2006). International mobility biographies: A means to capture the
institutionalisation of long-distance travel? Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4/5), 320-334.
Frändberg, L., & Vilhelmson, B. (2003). Personal mobility – a corporeal dimension of
transnationalisation. The case of long-distance travel from Sweden. Environment and
Planning A, 35(10), 1751-68.
Frost, W., & Hall, C.M. (Eds.) (2009). Tourism and national parks. London: Routledge.
Funk, C. (2006). Conflicts over space for marine leisure: A case study of recreational
boating in Japan. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4/5), 459-480.
Garrod, B., & Wilson, J.C. (Eds.) (2003). Marine ecotourism: Issues and experiences.
Clevedon: Channelview.
Garrod, B., & Wilson, J.C. (2004). Nature on the edge? Marine ecotourism in peripheral
coastal areas. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(2), 95-120.
Cartier, C., & Lew, A. (eds.) (2005). Seductions of place. London and New York:
Routledge.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
43
Getz, D., & Carlsen, J. (2000). Characteristics and goals of family and owner-operated
businesses in the rural tourism and hospitality sectors. Tourism Management, 21(6),
547-560.
Getz, D & Nilsson, P.A. (2004). Responses of family businesses to extreme seasonality
in demand: the case of Bornholm, Denmark. Tourism Management, 25, 17–30.
Getz, D., & Petersen, T. (2005). Growth and profit-oriented entrepreneurship among
family business owners in the tourism and hospitality industry. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 24(2), 219-242.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzmann, C., Scott, P., & Trow, M.
(1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in
Contemporary Society. London: Sage.
Gibson, C. (2008). Locating geographies of tourism. Progress in Human Geography,
32(3), 407-422.
Gibson, C., & Connell, J. (2003). Bongo fury: Tourism, music and cultural economy at
Byron Bay, Australia. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94(2), 164-
187.
Gibson, C., & Connell, J. (2005). Music and tourism, Clevedon: Channel View Press.
Gibson, C., & Connell, J. (2007). Music, tourism and the transformation of Memphis.
Tourism Geographies, 9(2), 160-190.
Gibson, C., and Klocker, N. (2004). Academic publishing as ‘creative’ industry, and
recent discourses of ‘creative economies’: some critical reflections. Area, 36(4), 423-
434.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gill, A. (2004) Tourism communities and growth management. In A. Lew, C.M. Hall,
& A. Williams (eds) Companion to tourism (pp. 569-584), Oxford: Blackwell.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
44
Gomez-Martín, B. (2004). An evaluation of the tourist potential of the climate in
Catalonia (Spain): A regional study. Geografiska Annaler, 86, 249-264.
Gomez-Martín, B. (2005). Weather, climate and tourism, Annals of Tourism Research
32(3), 571-591.
Gomez-Martín, B. (2006). Climate potential and tourist demand in Catalonia (Spain)
during the summer season. Climate Research, 32, 75-87.
Gregory, D. (1985). Suspended animation: the status of diffusion theory. In D. Gregory
& J. Urry (Eds.), Social relations and spatial structures (pp. 296-336). London:
Macmillan.
Gustafson, P. (2002). Tourism and seasonal retirement migration. Annals of Tourism
Research, 29(4): 899–918.
Gössling, S. (2000). Sustainable tourism development in developing countries: some
aspects of energy-use. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(5), 410–425.
Gössling, S., (2001). The consequences of tourism for sustainable water use on a
tropical island: Zanzibar, Tanzania. Journal of Environmental Management, 61(2), 179-
191.
Gössling, S. (2002). Global environmental consequences of tourism. Global
Environmental Change, 12(4), 283-302.
Gössling, S. (2003a). Tourism and development in tropical islands: Political ecology
perspectives. In S. Gössling (ed.) Tourism and development in tropical islands:
Political ecology perspectives (pp. 1-37). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Gössling, S. (2003b). The political ecology of tourism in Zanzibar. In S. Gössling (Ed.),
Tourism and development in tropical islands: Political ecology perspectives (pp. 178-
202). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
45
Gössling, S. (2006). Tourism Certification in Scandinavia. In S. Gössling, & J. Hultman
(Eds.), Ecotourism in Scandinavia. Lessons in theory and practice (p.63-75).
Wallingford: CABI.
Gössling, S., Borgström-Hansson, C., Hörstmeier, O., & Saggel, S.( 2002). Ecological
footprint analysis as a tool to assess tourism sustainability. Ecological Economics, 43(2-
3, 199-211.
Gössling, S., Bredberg, M., Randow, A., Sandström, E., & Svensson, P. (2006). Tourist
perceptions of climate change: A study of international tourists in Zanzibar. Current
Issues in Tourism, 9(4/5), 419-435.
Gössling, S., & Hall, C. M. (2006a). Uncertainties in predicting tourist travel flows
based on models. Editorial Essay. Climatic Change, 79 (3-4), 163-173.
Gössling, S., & Hall, C.M. (2006b). An introduction to tourism and global
environmental change. In: S. Gossling & C.M. Hall (Eds.), Tourism and global
environmental change (p.1-34). London: Routledge.
Gössling, S., & Hall, C.M. (Eds.) (2006c). Tourism and global environmental change.
London: Routledge.
Gössling, S., & Mattsson, S. (2002). Farm tourism in Sweden: Structure, Growth and
Characteristics. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 2(1), 17-30.
Gössling, S., Schumacher, K., Morelle, M., Berger, R., & Heck, N. (2004). Tourism and
street children in Antananarivo, Madagascar. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 5(2),
131-149.
Hall, C.M. (2002). Travel safety, terrorism and the media: the significance of the issue-
attention cycle. Current Issues in Tourism, 5(5), 458-66.
Hall, C.M. (2004). Small firms and wine and food tourism in New Zealand: Issues of
collaboration, clusters and lifestyles. In R. Thomas (Ed.), Small firms in tourism:
international perspectives (pp. 167-81). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
46
Hall, C.M. (2005a). Systems of surveillance and control: Commentary on ‘An analysis
of institutional contributors to three major academic tourism journals: 1992-2001’.
Tourism Management, 26(5), 653-6.
Hall, C.M. (2005b). Tourism: Rethinking the social science of mobility. Harlow:
Prentice-Hall.
Hall, C.M. (2005c). Reconsidering the geography of tourism and contemporary
mobility. Geographical Research, 43(2), 125-139.
Hall, C.M. (2005d). Time, space, tourism and social physics. Tourism Recreation
Research, 30(1), 93–98.
Hall, C.M. (2005e). Biosecurity and wine tourism. Tourism Management, 26, 931-8.
Hall, C.M. (2006a). The impact of tourism knowledge: Google Scholar, citations and
the opening up of academic space. EReview of Tourism Research, 4(5), 119-136.
Hall, C.M. (2006b). Space-time accessibility and the tourist area cycle of evolution: The
role of geographies of spatial interaction and mobility in contributing to an improved
understanding of tourism. In R. Butler (Ed.), The Tourism Life Cycle: Conceptual and
theoretical issues (pp. 83-100), Clevedon: Channelview.
Hall, C.M. (2006c). Tourism, biodiversity and global environmental change. In S.
Gössling, & C.M. Hall (Eds.), Tourism and global environmental change (pp.211-226).
London: Routledge.
Hall, C.M. (2006d). New Zealand tourism entrepreneur attitudes and behaviours with
respect to climate change adaption and mitigation. International Journal of Innovation
and Sustainable Development, 1(3), 229-237.
Hall. C.M. (2007a). Tourism and regional competitiveness. In J. Tribe, & D. Airey
(Eds.), Advances in tourism research, new directions, challenges and applications (pp.
217-230). Oxford: Elsevier.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
47
Hall, C.M. (2007b). Pro-poor tourism: Do “tourism exchanges benefit primarily the
countries of the South”? Current Issues in Tourism, 10(2-3), 111-8.
Hall, C.M. (2007c). North-South perspectives on tourism, regional development and
peripheral areas. In B. Jansson, & D. Müller (Eds.), Tourism in Peripheries:
Perspectives from the Far North and South (pp. 19-37). Wallingford: CABI.
Hall, C.M. (2008). Of time and space and other things: Laws of tourism and the
geographies of contemporary mobilities. In P. Burns, & M. Novelli (Eds.), Tourism and
mobilities (pp. 15-32). Wallingford: CABI.
Hall, C.M., & Coles, T.E. (2008). Conclusion: Mobilities of commerce. In T.E. Coles,
& C.M. Hall (eds) International business and tourism : Global issues, contemporary
interactions (pp. 273-283). London: Routledge.
Hall. C.M., & Mitchell, R. (2008). Wine marketing: A practical guide. Oxford :
Elsevier.
Hall, C.M., & Müller, D. (Eds.) (2004). Tourism, mobility and second homes: Between
elite landscape and common ground. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Hall, C.M., & Page, S.J. (2006). The geography of tourism and recreation: Space, place
and environment (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Hall, C.M., & Rusher, K. (2004). Risky lifestyles? Entrepreneurial characteristics of the
New Zealand bed and breakfast sector. In R. Thomas (Ed.), Small firms in tourism:
international perspectives (pp. 83-98). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Hall, C.M., & Sharples, L. (Eds.) (2008). Food and wine festivals and events around the
world: Development, management and markets, Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Hall, C.M., Timothy, D., & Duval, D. (2004). Security and tourism: Towards a new
understanding? Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 15, (2/3), 1-18.
Hall, C.M., & Williams, A.M. (Eds.), (2002). Tourism and migration: New
relationships between consumption and production. Dortrecht: Kluwer.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
48
Hall, C.M., & Williams, A. (2008). Tourism and innovation. London: Routledge.
Hall, D., Roberts, L., & Mitchell, M. (Eds.) (2005). New directions in rural tourism.
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Hall, D., Kirkpatrick, I., & Mitchell, M. (Eds.) (2005). Rural tourism and sustainable
business. Clevedon: Channel View Publishers.
Hall, D., & Brown, F. (2006). Tourism and welfare: Ethics, responsibility and sustained
well-being. Wallingford: CABI.
Hall, D., & Richards, G. (Eds.) (2003). Tourism and sustainable community
development. London: Routledge.
Ham. S.H., & Weiler, B. (2004). Diffusion and adoption of thematic interpretation at an
interpretive historic Site. Annals of Leisure Research, 7(1), 1-18.
Ham, S.H., & Weiler, B. (2007). Isolating the role of on-site interpretation in a
satisfying experience. Journal of Interpretation Research, 12(2), 5-24.
Hannam, K. (2002). Tourism and development I: Globalisation and power. Progress in
Development Studies, 29(3), 227-234.
Hardill, I. (2004). Transnational living and moving experiences: Intensified mobility
and dual-career households. Population, Space and Place, 10, 375-89.
Harlfinger, O. (1991). Holiday biometeorology: A study of Palma de Majorca, Spain.
Geojournal, 25, 377-381.
Harvey, D. (1984). On the history and present condition of geography: An historical
materialist manifesto. Professional Geographer, 36, 1-11.
Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies.
London: Macmillan.
Hellström, T., Jacob, M., & Wenneberg, S. (2003) The ‘discipline’ of post-academic
science: Reconstructing paradigmatic foundations of a virtual research institute. Science
and Public Policy, 30(4), 251–60.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
49
Hjalager, A., & Richards, G. (Eds.) (2002). Tourism and gastronomy. London:
Routledge.
Hudman, L., & Jackson, R.H. (2003). Geography of travel and tourism (4th ed.). New
York: Delmar Learning.
Hudson, R. (2004). Conceptualizing economies and their geographies. Spaces, flows
and circuits. Progress in Human Geography, 28(4): 447-471.
Hughes, A., & Reimer, S. (2004). Geographies of commodity chains. London:
Routledge.
Hunter, C. and Shaw, J. (2007) The ecological footprint as a key indicator of sustainable
tourism, Tourism Management, 28(1), 46-57.
Ioannides, D. (2003). Tourism ‘non-entrepreneurship’ in peripheral destinations: a case
study of small and medium tourism enterprises on Bornholm, Denmark. Tourism
Geographies, 5, 408–35.
Jackson, P. (1999). Commodity cultures: The traffic in things. Transactions of the
Institute of British Geographers, 24, 95-108.
Jafari, J. and Aaser, D. (1988). Tourism as the subject of doctoral dissertations,
Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 407-429.
Johnston, M. (2006). Impact of global environmental change on tourism in the polar
regions. In S. Gössling & C.M. Hall (Eds.), Tourism and global environmental change
(p.37-53). London: Routledge.
Johnston, R. (2000). Relevance. In R.J. Johnston, D. Gregory, G. Pratt, & M. Watts
(Eds.), The dictionary of human geography (4th ed.) (pp. 694-696). Oxford: Blackwells.
Johnston, R., & Sidaway, J. (2004). Geography and geographers: Anglo-American
human geography since 1945 (6th ed.). London: Hodder Education.
Judd, D., & Fainstein S. (1999). The Tourist City. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
50
Kang, S.K., & Page, S.J. (2000). Tourism, migration and emigration: Travel patterns of
Korean-New Zealanders in the 1990s. Tourism Geographies, 2(1), 50-65.
Kaplan, L. (2004). Skills development in tourism: South Africa’s tourism-led
development strategy, GeoJournal, 60(3), 217–227.
King, R., & Ruiz-Gelices, E. (2003). International student migration and the European
'Year Abroad': effect on European identity and subsequent migration behaviour.
Intemational Journal of Population Geography, 9, 229-252.
King, R., Warnes, A.M., & Williams, A.M. (2000). Sunset lives: British retirement to
the Mediterranean. London: Berg.
Kirsten, M., & Rogerson, C.M. (2002). Tourism, business linkages and small enterprise
development in South Africa. Development Southern Africa, 19, 29-59.
König, U. (1999). Climate change and snow tourism in Australia. Geographica
Helvetica, 54(3), 147-157.
Lau, G. and McKercher, B. (2007). Understanding the movement patterns of tourists in
a destination: A GIS approach. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(1), 39-49.
Law, C. (1992). Urban tourism and its contribution to economic regeneration, Urban
Studies, 29(3/4), 599–618.
Lew, A.A. (2001). Defining a geography of tourism. Tourism Geographies, 3(1), 105-
114.
Lew, A., Hall, C.M., & Williams, A. (Eds.) (2004). Companion to tourism, Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers.
Lew, A., Hall, C.M., & Timothy, D. (2008). World geography of travel and tourism: A
regional approach. Oxford: Elsevier.
Lew A., & McKercher, B. (2002). Trip destinations, gateways and itineraries: The
example of Hong Kong. Tourism Management, 23(6), 609-621.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
51
Lew A., & McKercher, B. (2006). Modeling tourist movement: a local destination
analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(2), 403-423.
Li, Y. (2000). Geographical consciousness and tourism experience. Annals of Tourism
Research, 27(4), 863–83.
Li, Y. (2008).
Liu, A, & Wall, G. (2006). Planning tourism employment: A developing country
perspective. Tourism Management, 27(1), 159-170.
Lumsdon, L., & Page, S.J. (eds) (2004). Tourism and transport: Issues and agendas for
the new millennium. Oxford: Pergamon.
Lundmark, L. (2005). Economic restructuring in a depopulating region? Tourism as
alternative to traditional sectors in the Swedish mountain range. Scandinavian Journal
of Hospitality and Tourism, 5(1), 23-45.
Lundmark, L. (2006). Mobility, migration and seasonal tourism employment.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 6(1), 54-69.
Malecki, E.J. (2004). Jockeying for position: What it means and why it matters to
regional development policy when places compete. Regional Studies, 38(9), 1101-20.
Marjavaara, R. (2007a). Route to destruction? Second home tourism in small island
communities. Island Studies Journal, 2(1), 27-46.
Marjavaara, R. (2007b). The displacement myth: Second home tourism as scapegoat for
rural decline. Tourism Geographies, 9(3), 296-317.
Mathieson, A., & Wall, G. (1982). Tourism: Economic, physical and social impacts.
Harlow: Longman Scientific and Technical.
McIntyre, N., Williams, D., & McHugh, K. (eds) (2006). Multiple dwelling and
tourism. Negotiating place, home and identity. Cambridge: CABI Publishing.
McKercher, B. (2005). A case for ranking tourism journals. Tourism Management,
26(5), 649-651.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
52
McKercher, B. (2008). A citation analysis of tourism scholars. Tourism Management,
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.03.003
McKercher, B., & Lau, G. (2007). Understanding the movements of tourists in a
destination: Testing the importance of markers in the tourist attraction system. Asian
Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 1(1), 39-53.
McKercher, B., & Lew, A. (2003). Distance decay and the impact of effective tourism
exclusion zones on in international travel flows. Journal of Travel Research, 42(2), 159-
165.
McMurray, K.C. (1954). Recreational geography. In P.E. James and C.F. Jones (Eds.),
American geography: Inventory and prospect. Syracruse: Syracruse University Press.
Michael, E.J. with Frisk, L., Hall, C.M., Johns, N., Lynch, P., Mitchell, R., Morrison,
A., & Schreiber, C. (2007). Micro-clusters and networks: The growth of tourism.
Oxford: Elsevier.
Mieczkowski, Z. (1985). The tourism climatic index: a method of evaluating world
climates for tourism. Le géographe canadien, XXIX (3), 220-233.
Milne, S., & Ateljevic, I. (2001). Tourism, economic development and the global-local
nexus: Theory embracing complexity. Tourism Geographies, 3(4), 369-93.
Minca, C., & Oakes, T. (2006). Travels in paradox : Remapping tourism. Blue Ridge
Summit : Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Mitchell, L.S., & Murphy, P.E. (1991). Geography and tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 18(1), 57-70.
Mitchell, R., & Hall, C.M. (2006) Wine tourism research: The state of play. Tourism
Review International, 9(4), 307-332.
Mosedale, J. (2006). Tourism commodity chains: Market entry and its effects on St
Lucia. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4/5), 436-58.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
53
Mosedale, J. (2008). The internationalisation of tourism commodity chains. In T.E.
Coles, & C.M. Hall (Eds.), International business and tourism : Global issues,
contemporary interactions (pp. 149-166). London: Routledge.
Murphy, P.E. (1985). Tourism: A Community Approach. London: Routledge.
Murphy, P.E., & Murphy, A.E. (2004). Strategic management for tourism
communities: Bridging the gaps. Clevedon: Channel View.
Monk, J. (2001). President’s column: Geographers’ territories. AAG Newsletter,
December, 3-4.
Mose, I. (ed) (2007). Protected Areas and Regional Development in Europe: Towards a
New Model for the 21st century. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2003). Tourism and sustainability: Development and new
tourism in the Third World. London: Routledge.
Müller, D.K. (2002a). Second home ownership and sustainable development in
Northern Sweden. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3, 343-355.
Müller, D.K. (2002b). German second homeowners in Sweden: some remarks on the
tourism-migration-nexus. Revue Européenne des Migrations Internationales, 18, 67-86.
Müller, D.K. (2002c). Reinventing the countryside: German second home owners in
southern Sweden. Current Issues in Tourism, 5, 426-446.
Müller, D.K. (2004). Tourism, mobility and second homes. In A.A. Lew, C.M. Hall, &
A.M. William (Eds.), A Companion to Tourism. Oxford: Blackwell.
Müller, D.K. (2006). The attractiveness of second home areas in Sweden: A quantitative
analysis. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4/5), 335-350.
Müller, D., & Hall, C.M. (2003). Second homes and regional population distribution:
On administrative practices and failures in Sweden. Espace Population Societes 2003-2,
251-61.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
54
Müller, D.K., & Jansson, B. (Eds.)(2007). Tourism in peripheries: Perspectives from
the far North and South. Wallingford: CABI International.
Ndlovu, N., & Rogerson, C.M. (2003). Rural local economic development through
community-based tourism: the Mehloding hiking and horse trail, Eastern Cape, South
Africa. Africa Insight, 33(1/2), 124–129.
Nel, E., & Binns, T. (2002). Place marketing, tourism promotion and community-based
local economic development in post-apartheid South Africa: the case of Still Bay—the
‘Bay of Sleeping Beauty’. Urban Affairs Review, 32, 184-208.
Nummedal, M., & Hall, C.M. (2006). Local food in tourism: An investigation of the
New Zealand South Island’s bed and breakfast sector’s use and perception of local food.
Tourism Review International, 9(4), 365-378.
Oppermann, M. (1998). What is new with the resort cycle? Tourism Management,
19(2), 179-80.
Orams, M. (2002). Feeding wildlife as a tourism attraction: A review of issues and
impacts. Tourism Management, 22(3), 281-93.
Orams, M. (2005). Dolphins, whales and ecotourism in New Zealand: What are the
impacts and how should the industry be managed? In C.M. Hall, & S. Boyd (Eds.),
Nature-based tourism in peripheral areas: Development or disaster (pp. 231-245).
Clevedon: Channelview.
Paasi, A. (2005). Globalisation, academic capitalism, and the uneven geographies of
international journal publishing spaces. Environment and Planning A, 37(5), 769-789.
Pacione, M. (1999a). Applied geography: In pursuit of useful knowledge. Applied
Geography, 19, 1–12.
Packer T., McKercher, B., & Yau, M. (2007). Understanding the complex interplay
between tourism, disability and environmental contexts. Disability and Rehabilitation,
29(4), 281-292.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
55
Page, S.J. (1994). Perspectives on tourism and peripherality: A review of tourism in the
Republic of Ireland. In C. Cooper and A. Lockwood (Eds.) Progress in Tourism,
Recreation and Hospitality Management, Vol. 5 (pp. 26-53). Chichester: Wiley.
Page, S.J. (1995) Urban Tourism, Routledge: London
Page, S.J. (2001). Hubs and gateways in South East Asia: Implications for tourism. In P.
Teo, & T. Chang (eds) Interconnected Worlds: South East Asian Tourism in the Twenty
First Century (pp. 81-96), Oxford: Pergamon.
Page, S.J. (2003). Evaluating research performance in tourism: The UK experience.
Tourism Management, 24(6), 607-22.
Page, S.J. (2005a). Academic ranking exercises: Do they achieve anything meaningful?
Tourism Management, 26, 663-6.
Page, S.J. (2005b). Transport and Tourism: Global Perspectives (2nd ed.). London:
Pearson Education.
Page, S. J. and Connell, J. (eds) (2008) Sustainable Tourism: Critical Concepts Volumes
1-4. London: Routledge.
Page, S.J., Forer, P., & Lawton, G.R. (1999). Small business development and tourism:
Terra incognita? Tourism Management, 20(4): 435-459.
Page, S.J., & Hall, C.M. (2003). Managing Urban Tourism . Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Page, S.J. and Thorn, K. (1997). Towards sustainable tourism planning in New Zealand:
Public sector planning responses, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5(1), 59–78.
Page, S.J. and Thorn, K. (2002). Towards sustainable tourism planning in New Zealand:
Public sector planning responses revisited, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(3), 223-
238.
Page, S.J., Steele, W. and Connell, J. (2006). Analysing the promotion of adventure
tourism: A case study of Scotland. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 11(1): 51-76

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
56
Papatheodorou, A. (2006). TALC and the spatial implications of competition. In R.
Butler (Ed.), The Tourism Life Cycle: Conceptual and Theoretical Issues (pp.67-82).
Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Patmore, J. A. (1983) Recreation and Resources, Blackwell: Oxford.
Pearce, D.G. (1979). Towards a geography of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 6,
245-272.
Pearce, D.G. (2001). An integrative framework for urban tourism research. Annals of
Tourism Research, 28(4), 926-946.
Pearce, D.G., & Schott, C. (2005). Tourism distribution channels: The visitors’
perspective. Journal of Travel Research, 44(1), 50-63.
Pearce, D.G., Tan, R., & Schott, C. (2004). Tourism distribution channels in
Wellington, New Zealand. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(6), 397-410.
Peeters, P. (2007). Tourism and Climate Change Mitigation – Methods, Greenhouse
Gas Reductions and Policies. NHTV Academics Studies No. 6. NHTV. Breda, The
Netherlands: Breda University.
Peeters, P., Szimba, E., & Duijnisveld, M. (2007a). Major environmental impacts of
European tourist transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 15, 83-93.
Pettersson, R. (2003). Indigenous cultural events - The development of a Sami winter
festival in Northern Sweden. Tourism, 51(3), 319-332.
Pigram, J.J., & Jenkins, J. (1999). Outdoor Recreation Management, London:
Routledge.
Pitkänen, K. (2008). Second-home landscape: The meaning(s) of landscape for second-
home tourism in Finnish Lakeland. Tourism Geographies,10(2), 169-192.
Preston-Whyte, R.A. (2002). Construction of surfing space at Durban, South Africa.
Tourism Geographies, 4(3), 307-28.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
57
Preston-Whyte, R.A. (2004). The beach as liminal space. In A. Lew, C.M. Hall, & A.
Williams (Eds.), Companion to Tourism (pp. 349-59). Oxford: Blackwell.
Prokkola, E. (2007). Cross-border regionalization and tourism development at the
Swedish-Finnish border “Destination Arctic Circle”. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 7(2), 120-138.
Reiser, A., & Simmons, D.G. (2005). A quasi-experimental method for testing the
effectiveness of ecolabel promotion. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13(6), 590-616.
Richards, G. (ed.) (2001). Cultural Attractions and European Tourism. Wallingford:
CABI.
Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (2006). Developing creativity in tourist experiences: A
solution to the social reproduction of culture. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1209-23.
Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (eds) (2007a). Tourism, Creativity and Development.
London: Routledge.
Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (2007b). The creative turn in regeneration: Creative spaces,
spectacles and tourism in cities. In M. Smith (Ed.), Tourism, culture and regeneration
(pp. 12-24). Wallingford: CABI.
Roberts, L. and Hall, D. (2001) Rural Tourism and Recreation: Principles to Practice.
Wallingford: CAB International.
Robinson, G. (1999). Countryside recreation management. In M. Pacione (Ed.), Applied
Geography: Principles and practice (pp. 257-273). London: Routledge.
Rodway-Dyer, S., & Shaw, G (2005). The effects of the foot-and-mouth outbreak on
visitor behaviour: the case of Dartmoor National Park, South-West England. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 13(1), 63-81.
Rogerson, C.M. (2002a). Tourism—a new economic driver for South Africa. In A.
Lemon, & C.M. Rogerson (Eds.), Geography and economy in South Africa and its
neighbours (pp. 95-110). Aldershot: Ashgate.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
58
Rogerson, C.M. (2002b). Driving developmental tourism in South Africa, Africa
Insight, 32(4), 33-42.
Rogerson, C.M (2002c). Tourism and local economic development: the case of the
Highlands Meander. Development Southern Africa, 19, 143-167.
Rogerson, C.M. (2003a). Towards pro-poor local economic development: the case for
sectoral targeting in South Africa. Urban Forum, 14, 53-79.
Rogerson, C.M. (2003b). Tourism planning and the economic revitalisation of
Johannesburg. Africa Insight, 33(1/2), 108-115.
Rogerson, C. M. (2004a). Urban tourism and small enterprise development in
Johannesburg: the case of township tourism, GeoJournal, 60(3), 247-257.
Rogerson, C.M. (2004b. Tourism, small firm development and empowerment in
postapartheid South Africa. In Thomas, R (Ed.), Small firms in tourism: international
perspectives (pp. 13-33). Oxford: Elsevier.
Rogerson, C.M. (2004c). Transforming the South African tourism industry: the
emerging black-owned bed and breakfast economy. GeoJournal, 60, 273-81.
Rogerson, C.M. (2005). Unpacking tourism SMMEs in South Africa: structure, support
needs and policy response. Development Southern Africa, 22(5), 623-642.
Rogerson, C.M. (2006). Pro-poor local economic development in South Africa: The role
of pro-poor tourism. Local Environment, 11(1), 37-60.
Rogerson, C.M., & Visser, G. (Eds.) (2004). Tourism and Development Issues in
Contemporary South Africa. Pretoria: Africa Institute of South Africa.
Ruhanen, L., & Cooper, C. (2004). Applying a knowledge management
framework to tourism research. Tourism Recreation Research, 29(1), 83-89.
Saarinen, J. (2003). The regional economics of tourism in Northern Finland: The socio-
economic implications of recent tourism development and future possibilities for
regional development. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 3(2), 91-113.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
59
Saarinen, J. (2004). Tourism and touristic representations of nature. In A. Lew, C.M.
Hall, & A. Williams (eds.), A companion to tourism (pp. 438–449). Oxford: Blackwell.
Saarinen, J. (2005). Tourism in the northern wildernesses: Wilderness discourses and
the development of nature-based tourism in northern Finland. In C.M. Hall, & S. Boyd
(Eds.), Nature-based tourism in peripheral regions: Development or disaster (pp. 36-
49). Clevedon: Channelview.
Saarinen, J. (2006a) Traditions of sustainability in tourism studies. Annals of Tourism
Research, 33(4), 1121–1140.
Saarinen, J., & Hall, C.M. (Eds.) (2004). Nature-based tourism research in Finland:
Local contexts, global issues, Finnish Forest Research Institute, Research Papers 916,
Rovaniemi: Rovaniemi Research Station.
Saarinen, J., & Tervo, K. (2006). Perceptions and adaptation strategies of the tourism
industry to climate change: the case of Finnish nature-based tourism entrepreneurs.
International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 1(3), 214-228.
Saethorsdottir, A.D. (2004). Adapting to change: Maintaining a wilderness experience
in a popular tourist destination. Tourism Today, 4, 52-65.
Scheyvens, R. (2002). Tourism for development: Empowering communities. Harlow:
Prentice Hall.
Scheyvens, R. (2005). Growth of beach fale tourism in Samoa: The high value of low-
cost tourism. In C.M. Hall, & S. Boyd (Eds.), Nature-based tourism in peripheral
areas: Development or disaster? (pp. 188-202). Clevedon: Channelview Publications.
Scheyvens, R. (2007). Exploring the tourism-poverty nexus. Current Issues in Tourism,
10(2&3), 231-254.
Scott, D. (2006). Global environmental change and mountain tourism. In S. Gössling, &
C.M. Hall (Eds.), Tourism and global environmental change (pp. 54-75). London:
Routledge.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
60
Scott, D., Amelung, B., Becken, S., Ceron, JP., Dubois, G., Gössling, S., Peeters, P., &
Simpson, M. (2007). Climate change and tourism: Responding to global challenges.
Madrid: World Tourism Organization & Paris: United Nations Environment
Programme.
Scott, D., Jones, B., & Konopek, J. (2007). Implications of climate and environmental
change for nature-based tourism in the Canadian Rocky Mountains: a case study of
Waterton Lakes National Park. Tourism Management, 28(2), 570-579.
Scott, D., Jones, B., & McBoyle, G. (2005). Climate, Tourism and Recreation: A
Bibliography -1936 to 2005. Waterloo, Canada: University of Waterloo.
Scott, D., McBoyle, G., & Mills, B. (2003). Climate change and the skiing industry in
Southern Ontario (Canada): exploring the importance of snowmaking as a technical
adaptation. Climate Research, 23, 171-181.
Scott, D., McBoyle. G., & Minogue, A. (2007). Climate change and Québec’s ski
industry. Global Environmental Change, 17(2), 181-190.
Scott, D., McBoyle, G., & Schwartzentruber, M. (2004). Climate change and the
distribution of climatic resources for tourism in North America. Climate Research,
27(2), 105-117.
Scott, D., Wall, G. & McBoyle, G. (2005). The evolution of the climate change issue in
the tourism sector. In C.M. Hall, & J. Higham (Eds.), Tourism recreation and climate
change (pp. 44-60). Clevedon: Channelview Press.
Sharpley, R. (2004). Tourism and the Countryside. In A. Lew, C.M. Hall, & A.
Williams (Eds.), A Companion to Tourism (pp. 374–86). Oxford: Blackwell.
Shaw, G., & Coles, T (2004). Disability, holidaymaking and the tourism industry in the
UK. Tourism Management, 25: 397-403.
Shaw, G., Veitch, C., & Coles, T. (2005). Access, disability and tourism: Changing
responses in the UK. Tourism Review International, 8, 167-177.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
61
Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (1994). Critical issues in tourism: A geographical
perspective (1st ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (2002). Critical issues in tourism: A geographical
perspective (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (2004). Tourism and tourism spaces. London: Sage.
Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (2008). Knowledge transfer and management in tourism
organisations: an emerging research agenda, Tourism Management in press.
Shoval, N., & Isaacson, M. (2006). Application of tracking technologies to the study of
pedestrian spatial behavior. The Professional Geographer, 58(2), 172-183.
Shoval, N., & Isaacson, M. (2007a). Tracking tourists in the digital age. Annals of
Tourism Research 34(1), 141-159.
Shoval, N., & Isaacson, M. (2007b). Sequence alignment as a method for human
activity analysis in space and time. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,
97(2), 282-97.
Sievanen, T., Tervo, K., Neuvonen, M., Pouta, E., Saarinen, J., & Peltonen, A. (2005).
Nature-based tourism, outdoor recreation and adaptation to climate change.
FINADAPT Working Paper 11. Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
Simpson, M.C., Gössling, S., Scott, D., Hall, C.M., & Gladin, E. (2008) Climate change
adaptation and mitigation in the tourism sector: Frameworks, tools and practice.
Tourism UNEP, University of Oxford, UNWTO, WMO: Paris, France.
Singh, S., Timothy, D.J., & R.K. Dowling, R.K. (Eds.) (2003). Tourism in destination
communities. New York: CABI Publishing.
Smith, D. M. (1977) Human Geography: A Welfare Approach, Edward Arnold:
London.
Smith, S.L.J. (2003). A vision for the Canadian tourism industry. Tourism Management,
24(2), 123-133.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
62
Smith, S.L.J. (2004). The measurement of global tourism: Old debates, new consensus,
and continuing challenges. In A. Lew, C.M. Hall and A. Williams (Eds.), A companion
to tourism (pp. 25–35). Oxford: Blackwell.
Smith, S.L.J. (2007). Duelling definitions: Challenges and implications of conflicting
international concepts of tourism, in D. Airey and J. Tribe (Eds) Progress in Tourism
Research (pp. 123-138). Oxford: Elsevier.
Stern, N. (2006). The economics of climate change: The Stern Review. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Stewart, J.Q. (1950). The development of social physics. American Journal of Physics,
18, 239–253.
Storey, D., Bulloch, H., & Overton, J. (2005) The poverty consensus: Some limitations
of the ‘popular agenda’. Progress in Development Studies, 5(1), 30-44.
Stuart, P., Pearce, G., & Weaver, A. (2005). Tourism distribution channels in peripheral
regions: The case of Southland, New Zealand. Tourism Geographies, 7(3): 235-256.
Telfer, D.J. (2002). The evolution of tourism and development theory. In R. Sharpley,
& D.J. Telfer (Eds.), Tourism and development: Concepts and issues (pp. 35-78).
Clevedon: Channel View.
Teo, P. (2003). Striking a balance for sustainable tourism: Implications of the discourse
on globalization. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(6), 459-474.
Timothy, D.J. (2001). Tourism and political boundaries. London: Routledge.
Timothy, D.J. (2002). Tourism and the growth of urban ethnic islands. In C.M. Hall, &
A.M. Williams (eds) Tourism and migration: New relationships between production
and consumption (pp. 135-151). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Timothy, D.J. (2003). Supranationalist alliances and tourism: Insights from ASEAN and
SAARC. Current Issues in Tourism, 6(3), 250-266.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
63
Timothy, D.J. (2004). Political boundaries and regional cooperation in tourism. In A.
Lew, C.M. Hall, & A. Williams (Eds.) Companion to Tourism (pp. 584-595). Oxford:
Blackwell.
Torres, R., & Momsen, J.H. (2004). Challenges and potential for linking tourism and
agriculture to achieve pro-poor tourism objectives. Progress in Development Studies, 4
(4), 294-319.
Tosun, C. (2005) Stages in the emergence of a participatory tourism development
approach in the developing world. Geoforum, 36, 333–52.
Tosun, C., & Timothy, D. J. (2003). Arguments for community participation in the
tourism development process. Journal of Tourism studies, 14(2), 2-15.
Turner, B.L., Clark, W.C., Kates, R.W., Richards, J.F., Mathews, J.Y., & Meyer, W.B.
(Eds.) (1990). The Earth as Transformed by Human Action, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Tuulentie, S. (2006). The dialectic of identities in the field of tourism: the discourses of
the indigenous Sami in defining their own and the tourists’ identities. Scandinavian
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 6, 25-36.
Tuulentie, S. (2007) Settled tourists: Second homes as a part of tourist life stories.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(3), 281-300.
Uriely, N. (2001). ‘Travelling workers' and 'working tourists': Variations across the
interaction between work and tourism. International Journal of Tourism Research, 3, 1-
8.
Urry, J. (2000). Sociology beyond societies: Mobilities for the twenty-first century.
London: Routledge.
Urry, J. (2004). Small worlds and the new ‘social physics’. Global Networks, 4(2), 109-
130.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
64
Viken, A., & Müller, D.K. (2006). Introduction: tourism and the Sami. Scandinavian
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 6, 1-6.
Visser, G. (2003). The local development impacts of backpacker tourism: evidence from
the South African experience. Urban Forum, 14, 264–293.
Visser, G. (2006). South Africa has second homes too! An exploration of the
unexplored. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4/5), 351-383.
Visser, G., & Rogerson, C.M. (2004). Researching the South African tourism and
development nexus, GeoJournal, 60(3), 201-215.
Wall G. (1998). Implications of global climate change for tourism and recreation in
wetland areas. Climatic Change, 40, 371-89.
Walker, L. and Page, S. J. (2007). The visitor experience of crime: The case of Central
Scotland, Current Issues in Tourism 10 (6): 505-542.
Weaver, D. (2006). Sustainable tourism. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Williams, A.M. (2006). Lost in translation? International migration, learning and
knowledge. Progress in Human Geography, 30(5): 588-607.
Williams, A.M. (2007). Listen to me, learn with me: International migration and
knowledge. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 45(2): 361-82.
Williams, A.M., & Balaz, V. (2000). Tourism in transition: Economic change in
Central Europe. London: I.B.Tauris.
Williams, A.M., & Balaz V. (2004). From private to public sphere, the commodification
of the au pair experience? Returned migrants from Slovakia to the UK. Environment
and Planning A, 36(10): 1813-1833.
Williams, A.M., & Balaz, V. (2005). What human capital, which migrants? Returned
skilled migration to Slovakia from the UK. International Migration Review, 39(2), 439-
468.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
65
Williams, A.M., & Hall, C.M. (2000) Tourism and migration: new relationships
between production and consumption. Tourism Geographies, 2(1), 5–27.
Williams, A.M., & Hall, C.M. (2002). Tourism, migration, circulation and mobility: the
contingencies of time and place. In C.M. Hall & A.M. Williams (Eds.), Tourism and
migration: New relationships between production and consumption (pp. 1-52).
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Williams, A.M., King, R., Warnes, A., & Patterson, G. (2000). Tourism and
international retirement migration: new forms of an old relationship in southern Europe.
Tourism Geographies, 2, 28-49.
Williams, S. (1998). Tourism Geography. London: Routledge.
Wolfe, R.J. (1964). Perspectives on outdoor recreation: a bibliographical survey. The
Geographical Review, 54(2), 203-238.

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
66
Table 1: Tourism articles in selected leading geographical journals 1998-2007
Journal Thomson
Scientific
(formerly
ISI)
Impact
Factor
2006
Ranking in
geography
and
impact
factor
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Average
per year
Annals of the
Association
of American
Geographers
5/39
(2.141) - - - - - 1 1 3 - - 0.5
Antipode 16/39
(1.287) - - - - 1 - - - 1 - 0.2
Area 21/39
(1.039) - - - 1 - - 1 - 1 - 0.3
Australian
Geographical
Studies /
Geographical
Research
1 - 1 - 1 1 - 2 1 3 1
Canadian
Geographer 28/39
(0.824) - - - - - - - 2 - - 0.2
Geografiska
Annaler,
Series B:
Human
Geography
23/39
(0.950) 1 1 2 1 - 3 1 1 - - 1
Progress in
Human
Geography
2/39
(3.440) - - 1 - - - - - - - 0.1
The
Geographical
Journal
17/39
(1.250) - - - 1 2 1 1 - 1 2 0.8
The
Professional
Geographer
20/39
(1.046) 1 1 1 - 3 - - 1 1 - 0.8
Tijdschrift
voor
Economische
en Sociale
Geografie
30/39
(0.614) 2 - - - - 1 1 - 2 - 0.7
Transactions
of the
Institute of
British
Geographers
1/39
(3.500) - - - 1 1 - 2 - - 1 0.5
Total 5 2 4 4 8 7 7 9 7 6 0.59
Note: Tourism in abstract, key words or title.
In comparison Tourism Management had an impact factor of 0.856 and Annals of
Tourism Research 0.543

Progress in Tourism Management: From the geography of tourism to Geographies
of Tourism – A review
67

Detailed Response to Reviewers