Search results

This paper aims to identify means and ways to reduce redundancies and increase relevance in tourism research in a culturally diverse and globalised world.

The content of this paper is based on minutes of an extensive discussion (panel as well as townhall-type of discussion) at the 2015 AIEST conference in Lijiang, PR China.

Challenges in today’s tourism research world are identified and ways of how to deal with them are shown. Some of those solutions might provoke change in certain domains. This is why ideas are provided for the AIEST to support and facilitate this change.

Limitations come from the research settings of this contribution, which is essentially based on records of a panel and a townhall-type discussion.

We try to provide food for thought, in order to provoke one or the other discussion. This is why we are happy to receive feeback.

Let me begin this essay with some propositions found in the preface to this study. “(A) dynamic of contradiction…stands at the heart of Marxist theory” (p. 8). And (quoting Engels) while “men make their own history…in that each person follows his own consciously desired end, and it is precisely the result of these many wills operating in different directions and of their manifold effect upon the world outside that constitute history.” “What driving forces in turn stand behind these motives? What are the historical causes which transform themselves into these motives in the minds of actors?” (p. 9). Hunt's study demonstrates that Engels was certainly a most contradictory figure, alternating and sometimes conjoining a life of womanizing and carousing to one of the serious and dedicated political work to one of the capitalist manager. As to the second issue, while Hunt shows the various influences that prompted Engels to move toward, indeed, facilitate the development of what is termed Marxism, the question of motivation that caused him to honor those influences is left unanswered. That is, while many were subject to the same influences, the same historical forces, why did Engels “allow” these forces to pull him in a particular direction?

FINANCIAL fears are only less cruel than those of war, and lead men into extravagances which they would repudiate indignantly in their cooler moments. If the doings of the Economy Committee at Manchester in relation to children's libraries, as described in the article by Mr. Lamb in our last issue, are true, we have in them an example of a kind of retrenchment at the expense of the young which we hope is without parallel and will have no imitators. Some reduc‐tion of estimates we hear of from this or that place, but in few has the stupid policy which urges that if we spend nothing we shall all become rich been carried into full effect. Libraries always have suffered in times of crisis, whatever they are; we accept that, though doubtfully; but we do know that the people need libraries.

The danger of damage to buildings and their contents that might be caused by German air‐craft and warships has been seriously exercising the thoughts of owners, trustees and occupiers, and strong representations have been made to the Board of Trade, urging upon the Government that the State should accept liability in respect of same. This seems only reasonable at a time like the present. The danger is a national one, while any damage done would naturally be local, and we believe the whole nation would be willing to bear the loss for the localities attacked. Mr. Runciman has intimated that the Government is only prepared to consider the matter on the lines of a modified scheme of State Insurance, and while we do not think this satisfactory, it is better than nothing, and some scheme should undoubtedly be arranged by which the local authorities could cover their risks so far as the Municipal Buildings and the Public Libraries are concerned. The Libraries, in many cases, particularly when holding in trust or through bequest or gift the collections of individuals, contain books and articles of great value, and the matter should be in the mind of all librarians, and not be allowed to drop.

Food products developed using genetically modified (GM) animals may soon be introduced in Europe and beyond. Their successful commercialisation depends on consumer acceptance, and so it is timely to review the existing literature in this respect. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

A systematic review identified 42 English language peer reviewed papers assessing public opinion of GM animals associated with food production. Thematic analysis was applied to the results to identify and explain consumer attitudes.

Publication peaked in 2004, and declined thereafter. European consumers were less accepting of GM animal technology than the US and Asian consumers, although the latter reported more ethical concern. Risk and benefit perceptions, ethical concerns (e.g. related to animal welfare) may explain negative consumer attitudes towards animals in food production.

There is a lack of data on consumer attitudes to GM animals applied to food production, in particular in relation to consumers in emerging economies and developing countries. This is problematic as applications of GM animal products are about to enter the market.

There is a need to track changes in public opinion as GM food production animals are further developed. The introduction and commercialisation of applications with specific characteristics may further shape consumer attitudes.

Methods need to be developed to involve consumers and other stakeholders in shaping future applications of agri-food applications of GM animals.

The review collates existing quantitative and qualitative knowledge regarding the drivers of consumer attitudes towards GM animals used in food production using systematic review methodology.