Search results

Since the end of the twentieth century a movement has been observed, both in geography of tourism and in fashion, spreading to districts located on the outskirts of cities. This is the case of Château Rouge, located in the 18th arrondissement of Paris. For years considered as a “no-go-zone,” the district is now experiencing parallel phenomena of “off-the-beaten-tracks” tourism and fashion development. This chapter analyzes the processes and actors behind the expansion of the tourism perimeter and the diversification of fashion venues, as well as the implications of these developments for the city of Paris.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the mechanisms involved in the progressive integration of marginal and peripheral urban areas, located close to established tourist destinations, into the visited tourism perimeter, and the interplay of the supporting public and private actors. It focusses on the intertwining processes of commercial gentrification, heritagization and aestheticization of former “ordinary” or marginal areas as tools for and indications of their tourism development. It explores how the metropolitan tourism geography is progressively redesigned.

Following a comprehensive literature analysis, the Saint-Ouen flea market was selected as the object of study. The methodology is based on extensive in situ observations, a systematic analysis of the press and a corpus of tourist guides and several in-depth interviews with local public and private stakeholders.

This paper shows that combined public (Parisian urban and tourism stakeholders) and private interests led to the integration in the tourism perimeter of a space that was once on the margins of the tourism and metropolitan area. It highlights the mechanisms of this integration and the link between touristification, gentrification, aestheticization and artification. It was found that private investors and political decision makers regard Saint-Ouen flea market as a major opportunity for tourism and real estate development, which leads to some contradictions regarding heritage protection. Finally, it shows that market traders opposed the evolution of a commercial place into a place of symbolic consumption. At another level, it shows the stakes of tourism diversification in a metropolitan tourism destination that is characterized by overtourism.

More studies are needed to identify not only the potential of flea markets to diversify tourist areas and practices, but also any potential resistance. The consequences on metropolitan tourism can be the subject of additional investigations: can this tourism diversification reduce overtourism in the centre, or is it only a diversification that functions as an additional driver of attractiveness? This research opens new perspectives on the modes of diversification (spatial and experiential) of metropolitan tourism as well as on the role that commercial changes play in these evolutions. It also makes it possible to question the modes of engagement of investors and traders in tourism.

This is an in-depth analysis of the case of Saint-Ouen flea market. The issues raised herein are applicable to similar peripheral urban areas, flea markets especially, that are rarely studied on the tourism-aestheticization-gentrification nexus. The analysis also shows the diversification of places and imaginaries of metropolitan tourism.

Millennials travel more than any other generation and they account now for some 40 percent of Europe’s outbound travel. As Millennials travel peaks, the purpose of this paper is to shed light on European Millennials, their characteristics and travel behaviors, and how their travel trends are shaping the present – and future – of the tourism industry.

The current study is based on content analysis of up-to-date academic publications and tourism industry reports.

The common characteristics and travel behaviors of Millennials drive four key tourism micro-trends: creative tourism, off-the-beaten-track tourism, alternative accommodation and fully digital tourism. Based on the growing importance of Millennials in global travel, these micro-trends are re-shaping supply and demand and transform the tourism and hospitality industries.

The study provides a novel understanding of Millennial travel, their characteristics and travel behaviors. The micro-trends identified are affecting destinations, hotels, attractions and other tourism businesses, as they re-define what tourists want and how they want it. Furthermore, these change drivers are expected to increase as Millennial travel continues to grow.

This paper aims to discuss tourism development, tourism policy development and its challenges in Rotterdam through the lens of “new urban tourism”, reviewing the relevance of the concept.

This paper comprises a review of the concept of new urban tourism and a case study of Rotterdam. Methods used include a literature review and social media search, an analysis of policy documents and street interviews.

Tourism in Rotterdam has grown rapidly, exhibiting aspects of new urban tourism such as encounters with the ordinary and everydayness, authenticity and de-differentiation. Details about tourism motives and nature of tourism are unknown. It is concluded that the concept of new urban tourism is a rather elusive and difficult notion to apply to the case of Rotterdam.

This research is a case study of one city.

This paper suggests that different tourism information and statistics are needed for policymaking and for understanding urban tourism.

The Rotterdam case raises new questions about new urban tourism, as the concept appears to be rather indefinable.

This paper aims to explore how overseas visitors experience off‐the‐beaten‐track areas and everyday life in London.

Initially scoped through quantitative research using visitor surveys involving some 400 respondents, the study was subsequently developed through qualitative research: 49 semi‐structured interviews with visitors from a wide range of countries.

These areas offer city visitors opportunities to create their own narratives and experiences of the city, and to build a cultural capital in a convivial relationship with other city users. At the same time, visitors contribute to the discovery of new areas for tourism ‐ and in some sense the creation of new places to visit.

Further research in other areas of London and in other world tourism cities is needed to develop ideas discussed here.

Subtler forms of tourism marketing are required to develop the potential of areas like those discussed in the paper.

Some tourists and residents enjoy a convivial and complementary relationship in area development.

The paper focuses on everyday life as an element in the attraction that cities exert for tourists, and on the visitors' contribution to recreating the city.

Starting from the hypothesis of an ordinary/extraordinary tension that drives the link between tourist places and non-tourist places, this paper discusses the issue of tourist spatial delimitations. Rather than take such an issue for granted, the paper argues that the author needs to understand how the different actors within the tourism system create specific delimitations and how tourists deal with these delimitations. To pinpoint these tourist spatial delimitations, this paper considers three types of discourses: the discourse of local promoters, the discourse of guidebooks and the discourse of tourists. The purpose of this paper is to explain not only the tourist delimitations established by these actors but also the concordance between the guidebooks’ prescriptions, the public actors’ strategies and the tourists’ practices. In this empirical investigation, the author uses the case of Los Angeles and focuses more specifically on the two main tourist places within the agglomeration: Hollywood and Santa Monica. The argument supports the idea that political actors tend to develop what the author could consider a tourist secession, as the author tends to precisely delimit the designated area for the sake of efficiency. Guidebooks, which the author must consider because they are true and strong prescribers of tourist practices, draw their own tourist neighbourhoods. Finally, most tourists in Los Angeles conform to these delimitations and do not venture off the beaten track.

This paper examines three types of discourses: the discourse of local tourism promoters, the discourse of tourist guidebooks and the discourse of tourists. The purpose of the study is to explain not only the tourist delimitations established by these actors but also the concordance between the guidebooks’ prescriptions, the public actors’ strategies and the tourists’ practices. To conduct this analysis, this paper relied on an empirical survey (Lucas, 2014b) whose methodology used a range of different techniques. First, interviews with Convention and Visitors Bureau managers were performed to understand the delimitations established by the institutional actors directly in charge of the tourist development of those places. Second, the second kind of discourse considered here is that in guidebooks. Los Angeles is often included in guidebooks about California in general, albeit with a much shorter number of pages. Although all guidebooks were considered, the study mostly focused on those specifically dedicated to Los Angeles (Time Out, Rough Guide and Lonely Planet) to conduct a thick analysis of their discourses and to note the spatial delimitations that they established. The author must regard guidebooks as the prescribers of practices because they represent a source of information for tourists. The aim is to determine how tourists follow – or do not follow – the recommendations of guidebooks. Third, to understand these practices, the paper considers numerous interviews (approximately seventy) conducted with tourists.

Thus, in these two examples, the author has distinguished powerful delimitations of the tourist places created by promoters through their discourse, which provides information on how they promote the place through urban planning. This tourist staging, and all the specific processing of the place, contributes to a clear distinction between these places and the rest of the urban environment, allowing a very precise definition. The distinction is made from one street to another. However, these delimitations are mainly defined by the practices of the tourists: they have a very selective way of dealing with the public space of the two places concerned. They validate, update and thus make relevant the limits established by the institutional operators, sometimes performing even stricter operations of delimitation. This way of dealing with space is observed in the urban planning and in the discourses on the tourist places expressed in the guidebooks. There are no tactics to bypass, divert and subvert the spatial configuration settled by local authorities and guidebooks; tourists do not attempt to discover new places or to go off the beaten track (Maitland and Newman, 2009). Yet, this is not the only explanation for the way in which tourists occupy a place. Although the guidebooks perform the operations of delimitation and rank places (insisting on one place over another and highlighting what should be seen, where to go, etc.), they also exhaustively present the practices that one can perform, and how tourists deal with space either hints at their disregard of these tools or at individuals’ selection based on the information given. In Hollywood, as in Santa Monica, while the guidebooks exhaustively enumerate the numerous sites that might be interesting for tourist practices, the author observes a very important and discriminating concentration of these tourist practices within a precisely delimited perimeter, respectively, the Walk of Fame and the Ocean Front Walk: tourists walk from one street to another and from a full to an empty space. Thus, the author can support the idea that how tourists cope with space are temporary, delimited by highly targeted practices and restricted only to a few tourist places.

What about the ordinary/extraordinary dialectic? Most tourists do not look for something ordinary; yet, the entirety of what could be considered as “extraordinary” in one metropolis is not included in its tourism space. On the contrary, tourist places can also be seen as “ordinary.” Nevertheless, there is clearly a distinction observed through the discourses, but also in the practices, between an “inside” and an “outside” and between something extraordinary and one’s ordinary environment. One can interpret this result as an actual confirmation of the classic combination (tourist/sight/marker) that constitutes a “tourist attraction” (MacCannell, 1976, p. 44), which concerns a very specific way of dealing with space in Los Angeles. Tourists do not practice Los Angeles as the author might assume that they would typically practice other metropolises, e.g. strolling down the streets randomly. The two places examined in this paper are open to that kind of practice. One can consider that these places have a higher degree of urbanity than the average area of Los Angeles precisely because there are tourists. The density in terms of buildings is (relatively) more important and accompanied by a narrative construction of the urban space (the historic dimension of the buildings), and the public space has undergone specific urban planning and given special consideration, at least greater consideration than elsewhere. In these places, the author finds a concentration of population – the metropolitan crowd – that is otherwise very rare in Los Angeles. However, the tourists seem to have a limited interest in these attractions. These classic characteristics of urbanity do not seem to be regarded positively by a certain number of tourists and are not taken into consideration by tourists. This observation contrasts somewhat with the idea that dwelling touristically in a metropolis primarily entails the discovery of its urbanity (Equipe MIT, 2005). Discovering Los Angeles does not consist of experiencing the local society and of exploring the urban space but, rather, of performing specific practices in Los Angeles (seeing the Hollywood sign and the Stars and walking along the famous beaches). Two approaches can help us understand this gap: considering Los Angeles as a specific case or considering that the spatial configuration of Los Angeles enables us to bring out the logic at work in other metropolises but that would be too complex to distinguish here. Perhaps, the author finds both elements, and this reflection must invite the author to continue the discussion on the logic of tourists’ practice of metropolises: are they really looking for a maximal urbanity during their metropolitan experiences?

This chapter provides the results of the motivations and the profile of the creative tourist. Results originate from the major studies done worldwide, concerned with the different types of activities. This analysis is essential to design new products based on Creative Tourism and sustainability. Also, because at an international level, including South Europe, the profile of the creative tourist has not been characterised, especially the one that visits medium-sized cities and rural areas. This chapter intends to answer the following questions: Who is the participant in Creative Tourism activities? Is he/she mainly domestic or an international tourist? Why does this type of tourist participate in these creative experiences? What type of information sources do these tourists use to find the experiences in which he/she participates? This chapter uses primary and secondary data. The secondary data follow a content analysis approach of activities offered by Airbnb Experiences Platform. Regarding the primary data, 595 questionnaires applied in 45 creative experiences in the Northern region of mainland Portugal were analysed. The creative experiences were divided into seven categories: ‘creative festivals’, ‘nature and creativity’, ‘photography workshop’, ‘gastronomy experience’, ‘industrial experience’, ‘technology and creativity’ and ‘art and crafts’. The methods used were quantitative in nature. The questionnaire used consisted of 31 closed questions aimed at the profile and the motivations of the creative experience participants. Descriptive statistical analysis was used. The main results showed that participants in the seven categories of Creative Tourism experiences have relatively large differences in terms of demographic and socio-economic characteristics. These differences were also evident in their motivations for participating in Creative Tourism experiences.

There are a large number of destinations in which post-conflict tourism (PCT) might be a relevant development option. This chapter considers four destinations which have opted to use the PCT brand as part of their strategies to attract tourists. These destinations – Cambodia, Nicaragua, Rwanda and Bougainville (within the country of Papua New Guinea) – are on four different continents, had conflicts which ended in the last decade of the twentieth century and represent tourism industries at different stages of development. They were also chosen because they are at low or medium levels of development and have relatively small populations of less than 20 million people. The chapter considers the different ways in which PCT is or might be used not only to provide economic opportunities for local residents, but also as a means towards reconciliation, healing and recovery after conflicts which have resulted in many casualties and divided the people against each other. Each of the case study destinations have attempted to turn a negative aspect of their histories into an opportunity for development, with differing levels of success.

This paper aims to contribute to urban tourism segmentation studies by examining the role of culture as a motivation for city visits, different preferences for activities and the demographic factors that influence activity choices. This study also compares the memorability of the trip across the segments identified based on their undertaken activities.

This paper draws on questionnaire data that was collected from 614 tourists in Budapest, Hungary. Tourist segmentation was based on a two-step procedure: principal component analysis and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis. Multinomial logistic regression was applied to reveal the effect of different demographic and travel-related characteristics on the segments.

The research revealed that cultural activities are still the most important motivation for urban tourists and that cultural tourists constitute the biggest segment (43%). They show a preference for heritage sites, museums and galleries rather than performing arts and festivals. Multinomial logistic regression showed that party tourists can be differentiated from cultural tourists and city break tourists predominantly by age and travel status. Older age groups and women are more likely to be interested in heritage sites, museums and galleries. Party tourists found their experience significantly more memorable than any other group and were much more likely to re-visit and recommend.

Overall, this study provides useful information for destination management organisations and city agencies about which activities to promote and how to segment and potentially target tourists. This study did not include lifestyle and personality factors, secondary and complementary attractions or cultural proximity and distance.

There have been relatively few recent studies on urban cultural tourism segmentation, especially in whole destinations rather than at individual attractions, it was therefore considered timely to re-visit this area of research. This paper reinforces the importance of segmentation studies in tourism and analyses the changing motivations and activity preferences of urban cultural tourists over time.