Introduction

The reflexive approach to tourism is based on the concepts of solidarity among tourists
and tourism destinations with future generations. The binding factor between tourists
and a local destination concerns the good of the planet and the stimulation of the kind
of development that allows populations to satisfy their present needs while ensuring
that future generations can satisfy theirs in the same way or better. The reflexive
approach to tourism is all about reciprocity and interactions with tourists on one hand
and local people, infrastructure and attractions on the other.
The need for approaching the phenomenon called tourism differently from the
reigning mainstream perceptions of the term emanate from the urgent call for an
effective implementation of sustainable development. Travel organizations, government
authorities, hotel owners or tourism attractions form the main actors responding to the
call for sustainable tourism development, but somehow most people involved in
tourism leave tourists out of the debate. This is all the more remarkable when we take
into account that these same tourists are the stars of the tourism show and therefore
the primary stakeholders. The case can partly be explained by the fact that the concept
of “tourism” was developed fully from the 1950s onwards – before, people were
simply travelling, which in turn was primarily a social activity. Some hundred years
ago one would stay for a couple of days with friends in the countryside or go to a local
beach, but during the twentieth century the concept of holidays further developed. In
the Western world today, people go for holidays at least 3 or 4 weeks per year. As a
result of a growing population and better economic conditions in the Western world
(later being followed by many Asian countries), millions of people take long holidays
and in the 21st century the holiday has become something sacred that nobody seems
to be able to do without anymore, in great contrast to the developing world. From the
West enormous transport networks were set up for coaches, trains and planes and in
order to confront these fast growing tendencies, chains of big resort hotelswere erected.
A pattern of big investments was developed, hand in hand with emerging large
international travel organizations and advertising machinery, while people started to
talk about the tourism industry. The people who had once been travellers became
clients of this new industry (tourists) and while travelling had been a social activity in
earlier days, from the 1960s on it became an economic matter of supply and demand
of tourism products. The travellers of earlier times had to accept how other places were
whereas the modern tourist insists more and more that his destination be adapted to
his taste and interests.
It is this view of tourists as clients and the client as king that seriously hampers any
effort to work as sustainably as possible. We can even go one step further and state
that without the active participation of tourists, any sustainable tourism development
runs the serious risk of getting stuck somewhere halfway in the process.
Putting travel organizations or hotels under pressure of a much needed sustainable
developmentis important, but can never become effective, when tourists do not know,
understand or are unwilling to react to the call to mitigate the effects of their
footprints. In short, there is no sustainable tourism without sustainable tourists. By the
way, with “sustainable tourists” I am not referring to tourists staying for ever, but to
those tourists or travellers who have some understanding of sustainable development and
try to act accordingly.
There is another reason that points to a need to approach tourism differently: from the
1970s onward a tendency can be observed that is commonly referred to as post-
modernism. Without getting too much involved with the meaning or background of
the trend, it stems from the general socio-cultural shifts that mark the post-modern
era. Profound changes in the way place and time are experienced as a result of
accelerated globalization lead to a new questioning of identity, the self and the place
people take in this world. It refers to the trend that people’s strong feelings of being
tied to a certain place and culture are slowly giving way to being tied to a certain time
or era. People tend to feel that time and space are compressed and they appear to have
a less coherent sense of self and start having a rather fragmented identity in living
cultural pluralism.
There is a new questioning of identity, the self and the place people occupy in this
world.
Thus, cultural pluralism, a major characteristic of the postmodern landscape, is
nowhere better illustrated than by the expanding horizons of tourism. As a
consequence, the number of activities and experiences that can legitimately be
categorised as tourism has increased significantly and it seems that nearly every
dimension of human culture now has the potential to become a form of tourism.
Additionally, an increasing preoccupation with consumption could be said to make
tourism the archetypal postmodern activity, as by its very nature it relies on the
consumption of natural artefacts or built environments and cultures.
Under the influence of post-modernism there is a growing tendency among tourists to
have more interest in authenticity as an outcome of a world where people feel they
have become alienated from nature and where everyday life is viewed as increasingly
un-authentic. Tourists seems to look for their own way to go, selecting what they may
like and discarding what does not seem to fit their idea of something new, different
and authentic. Increasingly tourists do not follow the supply side anymore, but start
looking for developing their own way of having a holiday. The influence of mass
media, the ever more multiple socio-cultural character of societies combined with a
decreasing religiousness and increasing incredulity have a marked influence on the
lifestyle of many societies, and not just the western ones in this case.
Increasingly individualistic behaviour among tourists concerning the search for self
and self-realisation and the role of nature and authenticity in this quest are all
tendencies that make the tourist the centre of attention and also involve the need to
accept him as a full-fledged partner in tourism, since it is the tourist himself who has
started to develop a new interest and view on tourism. Furthermore, people’s growing
uncertainty about present and future pushes them towards a nostalgic desire for a
beautiful past and idealized authenticity. Tourists often travel to third world countries
precisely to find something of the “old-fashioned” where time seems to have halted.
The aforementioned economic changes in tourism as well as the socio-cultural
developments in most western societies do not necessarily fit with the urgent need for
sustainable tourism development. Since the latter is of fundamental importance for the
survival of our planet, there is an equally urgent need to reformulate some of the basic
assumptions of tourism.
PART I
The cornerstone of reflexivity in tourism: the encounter of tourists and their tourism
destination.

By eliminating the economic separation of the tourist (client) on one hand and the
tourism “industry” on the other and by joining these two forces into one major social
activity called tourism, a basis can be laid for a gradual incorporation of tourists
within the sustainable development process. This can be achieved by focusing on
the experience the tourist lives rather than considering him the centre of the action.
Tourism is about living experiences – in tourism nobody can sell them and only
tourists can live them. This precise moment of living anexperience represents the
meeting point between tourists and the destination in the widest sense of the word.
Therefore when approaching tourism reflexively the moment of experiencing is the
pivot on which tourism hinges and it must ensure the existence of a balance between
the benefits that both the tourists and the tourism destination receive from this
tangible or sometimes intangible encounter. Tourists, therefore, are an inseparable and
integrated part of tourism.
This also means that tour operators, local agents, travel stores and so on are to be seen
asintermediary agents and not as the backbone of an industry. They help tourists and
the destination meet each other. They influence tourists and destinations and try to
match one with the other. Travel organizations in general do so for economic gains,
although nowadays more of them are also propelled by other reasoning.
The sublime moment of this encounter between tourists and their destination is the
instance of living an experience. Similar to eating a meal where there is an intake of
calories, the tourist receives impulses through the senses – the sensory intake. We
shall extend this idea of consumption of calories and call the impact of signals through
the senses the intake ofimpact calories – in short ImpCal. These ImpCal are processed
by the brain. A unit of consumed and processed ImpCal is called an experience and that
is exactly what the tourist is looking for. In fact, the tourist pays for the possibility of
consuming ImpCal with potential experiences as a result. For more
on Impcal see http://www.tourismtheories.org/?cat=50
Tourists select their holiday destination on the grounds of certain personal interests
and the attraction of some particular highlight, such as a famous waterfall, national
park or world city. We call these tourist attractions Impact Sources or Impsources.
When they are of sufficient importance for tourists to select their holiday destination
(macro or micro), we call them MainImpsources. Nearby there may be smaller tourist
attractions developed for tourists, the so-calledSide Impsources (a small museum,
canopy tour or botanical garden).
Apart from these, there is the normal entourage of local daily life; the kind
of Impsources that occur along the main road and may form a potential experience for
free. We call theseSharedImpsources because the local population shares them with
tourists. Another possible ImpCalintake can be produced by chance meetings or
sudden occurrences called the IncidentalImpsources (accidents are another kind
of incidental Impsource that unfortunately may lead to negative experiences). Tourism
consists of a large number of people, organizations, hotels or other types of buildings,
means of transport and many other entities that form a complicated pattern of
networks and relations. Tourists form part of these networks, too. For more
onImpsources and experiences, see http://www.tourismtheories.org/?cat=51
For a better understanding of a reflexive approach to the tourism of tourists it is
important to realize that there is a fundamental difference between main
and side Impsources on the one hand and shared and incidental ones on the other. The
first are developed specifically for tourists while the latter form part of a destination
with or without the presence of tourists. A lovely landscape, picturesque village, local
food or an old oak tree are all there anyway and tourists do not have to pay to see
them, no reservations have to be made and no travel organizations are involved.
Actually, an important part of experiences gained during a holiday stem precisely
from these shared Impsources. They provide not only the general impressions of a place
(the atmosphere), but also the small details such as a particular smell, sound or
something as human as a smile.
The Tourists’ Lifestyles

Within the limited scope of a holiday – or of being a tourist – we can distinguish

different types of tourists, based on character traits and lifestyle. We can set up a scale
with two extremes, and as is often the case with any social activity, most people can
be placed somewhere in the middle.
One extreme of this scale refers to those people that are individualists and travel alone
or with a partner or friend. They will make their own itineraries and travel at their
own rhythm and pace. They want to be active, tend to avoid typical tourist sites
(main Impsources) and have a keen interest in local populations and their culture.
Volunteer work is a serious option and encounters with one’s self and with people
from other cultures are of great importance. These people challenge themselves in
extreme situations – either physically or socially – with an emphasis on their own
performance. This is the idealistic end of the scale and since these people try to depart
from the usual standards, we can also call it the allocentric part of the lifestyle scale.
The other end of the scale gives us a profile of people who do not want any problems,
they like to have everything arranged for them and they want complete relaxation.
Their main concern is physical and therefore their interests are in the fields of
sunbathing, massages, spas or plastic surgery, just to mention a few. They have no
particular interest in local people or their culture. We call this end of the scale the
psycho-centric one.
The selection of where to go and the change from pre-tourist to real tourist means that
a fair number of complicated decisions must be made. How much time the tourist has
available, the budget, travelling individually or in a group, going by airplane or cruise
ship and many more elements must be factored in. Tourists at different ends of
this Tourist Lifestyle Scale (TLS) will handle their decisions differently. Those on the
allocentric side tend to pay providers directly at the destination as much as possible,
while more psycho-centric tourists favour paying home country travel organizations
up front, for example.
It should be clear that tourists from the allocentric side of
the TLS prefer shared Impsourceswhile those on the psychocentric side concentrate
more on main and side Impsources. This is not just a matter of lifestyle; it also has to do
with the way people experience things. People on the allocentric side of the scale take
in much more unexpected Impcal, meaning that they do not know beforehand exactly
what to expect and they are open to anything occurring around them. Tourists on the
psychocentric side however, know quite well what to expect and their sensory intake
concerns the expected Impcal. This may lead to the disadvantage of only seeing what
one expects and not seeing anything else. However, people on the far end of the
psychocentric side of the scale want just that: to see what they expected and they are
not usually in for surprises. For more information on tourists’ life styles
see http://www.tourismtheories.org/?cat=104
The Destination

Since we pointed out that the reflexive approach in tourism refers to the reciprocal
relationship between tourists and tourism destinations, we shall have a closer look at
what a destination comprises.
A destination consists of:
1. Travellers:
1A Tourists;
1B Travellers who happen to be at a place (and become tourists for a few days); even
day-visitors fall into this category;
2. Tourism Infrastructure:
2A Tourist attractions purposely designed for tourists and provided with the
necessary amenities for them (main and side Impsources);
2B Hotels, restaurants, souvenir shops, information centres, and roads constructed
for tourism, tourism transport, local travel agents, etc.;
3. Local Infrastructure: houses, schools, shops, banks, clinics, local authorities, etc.,
for the use of the local population or anyone who happens to be there; as such these are
considered shared Impsources for tourists;
4. Local people, including the local population and anyone who happens to live there at
the moment;
4A Those involved with tourists, travellers or the tourism infrastructure;
4B Those not directly involved in tourism.
From the scheme above we can deduce that tourism destinations are rather
heterogeneous affairs with many stakeholders from all walks of life such as owners of
establishments, managers, tourists, local farmers, employees and even investors,
developers or intermediaries.
Can we call a place a tourist destination when there are no tourists? Some may argue
that a tourist destination receives its name because the destination has been prepared
to receive tourists, while others feel that without tourists there is no tourism. My point
of view is that a destination becomes a tourist destination when there are tourists, who
therefore form an intrinsic part of a destination. This also means that a tourist
destination may be so named in spite of the fact that it is not ready to receive tourists –
they simply come for one reason or another and it is precisely these types of cases that
concern many of the negative effects tourism may have: the lack of proper preparation
at a destination for receiving tourists. At the same time one must realize that the term
‘tourist’ should be viewed in the widest sense possible: many tourism destinations
cater to day-visitors (beaches) or the participants in seminars or conferences and there
may be few ‘real’ tourists in the narrow sense of the word.
Many entities become involved in forming a tourist destination and attracting tourists.
Not only are there stakeholders at the destination itself, but we can also find
intermediaries between tourists on the one hand and tourist attractions, infrastructure
and local populations on the other, which usually operate from outside the destination
area or even from another country or continent. These intermediaries consist mainly
of travel organizations that may be active in the destination country and/or the
tourists’ home country, but they can also include national tourism boards or NGOs.
They provide tourists with target information, material images and factual information.
Their role at a destination is therefore indirect, but the persuasive power they have
over tourist holiday choices and the dominant position they occupy on many levels of
information supply mean in practice that these travel organizations can exercise an
important influence at a destination.
Governmental authorities are very influential stakeholders that operate within and
from outside a destination. Their role can be of fundamental importance, although
their absence does not mean that effective sustainable development cannot exist. Setting
up short, medium and long term policies for the development of an area should be a
matter for all stakeholders involved, but in practice we have often encountered a
considerable gap between authorities on the one hand and private stakeholders on the
other. Establishing policy lines for a specific sustainable tourism development is a
complicated matter, whereby all parties involved should bear clearly in mind that it is
all about the possibility of creating Impcal intake from Impsources – either main or
shared. The need for adequate tourism infrastructure rises primarily from a necesity to
protect the environment and not from an economic need to generate profits. The
encounter between tourists and a destination has to be seen in this light and this holds
true for governmental authorities alike.
PART II
Tourists and Sustainable Development

We introduced the idea of the reflexive approach to tourism, since tourists must be more
effectively involved in sustainable tourism development. There are three ways in
which this can be achieved: by motivating them and creating a need, by forcing them
to do so by creating regulations, or by means of an interaction between tourists and
destination: a reflexive approach.
In the case of the first option we should realize that for tourists to play a more active
part insustainable development they must first be motivated to do so. Main actors to help
create a motivation are travel organizations and the media – the first through material
imaging and the latter by mental imaging. Motivation will lead to a need, which in
turn will set the first expectations for a destination. The basic assumption here is that
tourists, once they have decided on their holiday destination, not only develop the
corresponding expectations, they also form a direct interest in a destination with a
certain amount of involvement at the same time. Once selected, a destination is seen
in a different light – it has become THEIR destination. Generally speaking this
interest means that tourists may first develop a feeling of economic involvement(e.g.
leaving as much money as possible at the destination itself and not with travel
organizations); secondly they may have a feeling of solidarity specifically with future
generations (their own and those of the people at the destination); thirdly there should
be acommitment to protecting biodiversity; fourth, there is social responsibility; and
fifth, there must be respect for other cultures. We mention here five different levels of
showing interest, notions that should be shared by most tourists. These in turn can be
translated into a uniform behaviour pattern among tourists at a destination so they can
be seen as a more or less homogeneous group that plays a role in the sustainable
development of a place. The proper preparation based on the five levels mentioned here
can produce a common denominator among tourists regarding their relationship with
the tourist destination.
The same five components refer to the three pillars on which the concepts
of sustainable development are based: planet, people and profit. In the case of economic
involvement this is obvious; then there are the elements of solidarity and commitment
referring to the planet, while social responsibility and cultural respect refer to people.
In this case interest and involvement in a destination relate to a fairly recent tendency
among people to communicate actively with groups or individual people from other
cultures. The growing interest people show in other peoples’ ways of living or in the
environment in general seems to be closely linked to many Internet developments, of
which the social networks (such as Facebook and Twitter) are the most noteworthy.
As selectors tourists may insist on their lodging being certified in one way or another,
now that sustainable tourism certification systems exist in many countries. The
Internet plays an important part in this respect and those tourists who make bookings
through travel organizations may insist on bookings with certified hotels or tourists
attractions as much as possible. Important here is the fact that tourists know what
Certifications of Sustainable Tourism (CST) are and they have at least some interest
and motivation to have sustainability issues play a part when selecting micro holiday
destinations. We encounter here a clear difference between tourists from the
allocentric and psychocentric sides of the Tourist Lifestyle Scale. The more idealistic
(allocentric) tourists will insist on the use of certified sustainable tourism
infrastructure much more than those going to an all-inclusive resort hotel.
A second way to help tourists to support sustainable development is by simply forcing
them to do so. Government or destination-level regulations on energy and water use as
well as recycling practices can prove to be effective. Limited access to protected
nature areas is another example, the same as regulations for “clean” means of
transport.
That means in practical terms, that travel organizations have to tell tourists what they
can do and what they should not do. The list of do’s and don’ts may be a long one
(concerning ecological, social and cultural behaviour and how to handle money
locally in a sustainable way) and tourists should realize beforehand, that they cannot
do whatever they like during their vacation (interesting point for the psychocentric
side of the TLS scale!).
The option of tourists taking a small exam (set up by some government organizations
via the Internet) is another possibility of making sure tourists mitigate the impact of
their footprints. In first instance this may be done by an Eco-behaviour Statement to
be signed by the tourist in similar fashion to sustainability statements issued by travel
companies. In a later stage or in the case of visits to protected nature areas this
actually should be a sort of exam – again via the Internet. The advantage is twofold:
first of all it is a way to ensure reasonably sustainable tourist behaviour at a
destination and secondly it makes the tourists conscious of the sustainability issues
and his interest should be aroused. From the point of view of the reflexive approach to
tourism, the sequence of actions is as follows: governments’ entities or travel
organizations force tourists to study some aspects of sustainable behaviour > Tourists
read/study about sustainable issues and will get involved (how little this may be) >
improved sustainable tourist behaviour at a destination may motivate local people and
enterprises.
The consciousness a tourist should have about the environment and the footprints he
leaves behind should lead to the notion whether luxury is necessary or not. Many
Western tourists as well as ones from other parts of the world use a holiday to do
and experience things that are not available at home. One example of this behaviour
would be partaking of a higher level of luxury than people are used to at home. In the
1980s many tourists accepted staying in rooms with shared bathrooms but today this
is unthinkable and most tourists go for rooms with a luxury private bathroom
(preferably with a Jacuzzi), flat screen TV, DVD player, Wi-Fi and mini bar. It has to
be made clear to tourists that luxury does not necessarily mean a significant increase
in experiences gained and that this same luxury has nothing authentic about it. Most
movements unleash counter effects though, so we can see on the allocentric side of
the Tourist Lifestyle Scale a growing market for people who are more interested in the
simple things of life without much comfort at all.
Another way of imposing sustainable conduct upon tourists is by choice editing: travel
organisations in general and local tourism infrastructure particularly just offer what is
sustainably sound.

The third way to involve tourists with a destination is by generating an interaction

between the destination and tourists, also referred to as the reflexive approach. One
must realize that it is important to accept tourists as full-fledged partners in tourism.
The key moment of a holiday is the tourists’ sensory intake at an Impsource and it is all
about this instance of interaction between tourists and destination. Therefore, let us
have a look how reflexivity works in tourism:
Three levels of reflexivity

In sociology when talking about reflexivity there are several ways the term is used.
First, there is the reflexivity related to an action: you act on a
certain expectation but by doing so you reinforce even more
what you expected. When there are rumours that the stock
exchange may crash, people will sell their shares because of this
expectation and obviously this reaction will cause the stock
market to go down. One of the applications in tourism is what is
called “the self-fulfilling prophecy”. This is when a person puts
a tremendous amount of expectation on a specific part of his
holiday and by trying to avoid losing face, he will make sure
that he indeed has the incredibleexperience he hoped for. When a
tourist feels and expresses that the greatest possibleexperience in
life is visiting the Galapagos, this tourist will then do everything
possible, consciously and even more so unconsciously, to make
sure that afterwards he can say he indeed had the experience of a
lifetime.
Expectations play an important part in tourism, but too often this
only refers to the case of the tourist. There are expectations at
the destination as well, and in my view not enough research has
been carried out to see to what extent these expectations
influence some of the actors in tourism.
The reflexivity of action applied to tourism refers to prejuduces,
fixed ideas and expectations, that both parties are willing to
adhere to and so seemingly have expectations come true. If
tourists expect to see the locals in original costumes and the
local people therefore dress up for tourists to have their
expectations fulfilled, the true encounter between tourists and
local community becomes unrealistic.
Theme: Expectations
Secondly, it applies to the actor himself: for example, the psychologist who has to
be psycho-analyzed himself, too. In order words, all those people analyzing tourism
should be analyzed themselves as well. This analysis concerns the role each actor has
to fulfil in the various tourism activities and this analysis has to be carried out by other
actors. It means that the tourist has to be analyzed by people from a destination.
Tourists’ needs, expectations, ways of living experiences and the final experiences
they will get have to be studied profoundly in the light of a socio-psychological
approach. Next the tourist has to be analytical as far as his tourism destination is
concerned and must make observations, apart from the Impcal intake and subsequent
experiences he will have. Therefore the tourists’ analysis of a destination in relation to
their expectations plays a role that is just as important as that of an Impsource’s
manager researching tourists’ behaviour.
Theme: Evaluation
The third application of reflexivity is between actor and action. Here we must
consider that an investigator, in the process of researching his subject, has an
influence on it and therefore he can never get a fully objective result. For example,
tourists love to have a “peek behind the scenes” in a village to get to know the real life
that the locals live, but in doing so they have an effect on that same local life. It is this
level of reflexivity that best shows us the influence tourists and tourism can have on
a local population and its culture. Tourists are very keen to see real objective
authenticity but in attempting to do so, they disturb the environment and the local
culture and most likely all they will see is some staged authenticity instead or perhaps
none at all. Authenticity therefore is an important part of tourism: it is about
something unique with clear socio-cultural ties, but it may lose its authenticity when it
is mass-marketed or normalized by globalization or other factors. Conversely, local
people may be keen on showing tourists some real authenticity, but in doing so it
becomes standard and no longer unique.
It is precisely in this element of reflexivity that we can differentiate the several faces
of what we call authenticity. Real and objective authenticity is one possibility, but
there is also the type where an object or phenomenon is experienced as authentic. The
story about the object may induce a feeling of authenticity, forming part of the
relationship between the tourist, the object and its image. One step further leads us to
activity-related authenticity, directly concerning a person’s Self and his change in
view from experiencing an object, phenomenon or activity. By going fishing, you may
get a tremendous feeling of peace and quiet – an authentic experiencetherefore,
although not necessarily related to a well-defined Impsource.
Once again we touch on the importance of the difference between main
and side Impsources as being staged for tourists, and the shared Impsources that are there
even when the tourists are not.Shared Impsources cannot be staged, otherwise they
would be converted into tourist attractions and as such, would no longer form part of
the local’s everyday life. Shared Impsources may be authentic for tourists but not
necessarily for the local population. A village’s daily routine does not give a feeling of
uniqueness to any local person, but since it differs from the tourist’s home
environment, it is of great interest to them.
Theme: Authenticity
Reflexivity and Sustainability

Translating this point to the level of sustainable development, we can distinguish

the Impsourcesthat are being managed specifically for tourists (in socio-economic or
environmental ways) from the shared Impsources, whereby sustainability issues concern
the locals in the first place and they have a direct responsibility in this respect. We
touch here on the difference betweensustainable development and sustainable tourism,
with the latter concerning just the main andside Impsources and any other tourism
infrastructure.
It is important to note that I insist on a clear distinction at a destination
between Impsources and infrastructure mainly intended for tourists on the one hand and
any other structure that is there without any direct link to tourists on the other. From
the point of view of sustainability there is a clear difference between the two and in
addressing sustainable development issues one has to keep the two separate.
Stakeholders at a destination must clearly see which part of a destination has been
made fit for tourism and which parts remain as they were with or without tourism.
Tourists’ involvement with a destination can only reach a certain point: where tourism
stops and local life begins. This third point of reflexivity relates not only to tourists
and their influence on a destination, but also to the influence a sustainable tourism
development may have and the way it affects local life.
Any community has its own commitment to future generations which may be strong
or nearly non-existent. However, what we often see nowadays is a tourism
infrastructure (such as hotels) that is nearly forced to be as sustainable as possible,
while the rest of the village or town nearby may be dirty, anti-environmental and far
from carbon neutral. The influence sustainable tourism practices have on a local
population can be observed in some areas, while there are still many cases (if not the
majority) whereby this is not the case.
In practice sustainable development is still a matter of (government) authorities, NGOs
or any other private or public body involved. Two of the main actors in tourism –
tourists and local populations – seem to be playing a marginal role so far. By applying
a reflexive approach to tourism I have tried to make clear why tourists are the main
stakeholders in tourism and that they play a fundamental role in a tourism
development. The same holds true for a destination. I explained that a destination is
not just a combination of hotels and tourist attractions, but that everyday local life
plays an important part in tourism, too.
Those who continue to consider tourism to be a mere economic activity do not realize,
that a great part of experiences gained by tourists stem from shared Impsources. A
sustainable tourism development that ignores what is not part of the tourism
infrastructure cannot be effective. Only by putting the encounter between tourists and
what is local in the heart of tourism and any sustainable tourism development we can
find the balance for a general sustainability directed at the future generations of both
locals and tourists.