Search results

The increasing need for the prevention and management of overtourism calls for more and improved visitor management (VM). Certain types of destinations or sites have implemented VM, such as nature parks that depict more controllable environments and involve only limited and clearly defined actors. Academic research on VM has mainly addressed protected areas and national parks, with a focus on environmental sustainability. The growing discussions around the term overtourism, in contrast, have largely centred around urban areas and the impacts on local societies, and, thus, socio-cultural sustainability. This chapter's overall aim is to provide a comprehensive overview of the status quo and knowledge gaps related to stakeholder involvement in VM in the broader context of overtourism. We ask who, how and in what areas stakeholders should be involved in VM. A systematic literature review was conducted using Scopus and Web of Science databases. The findings demonstrate that most studies applied a narrow and fragmented approach that focussed on one or a few stakeholders. Moreover, the strategies were mostly reactive instead of preventive and followed top-down approaches. Conflicts between stakeholders reveal risks to sustainable destination development, trigger overtourism debates and call for new approaches to VM. The chapter proposes a framework that suggests the chief VM responsibilities and stakeholders, concentrating on destination organisations, governments and residents. Also, it provides examples of participative methods, illuminates that VM should be proactive, sustainable and holistic and proposes better integration with destination management and local community governance.

Based on a news media review, this chapter explores how micro enterprises (MEs) and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) within the Norwegian tourism sectors were impacted by COVID-19 in early 2020. It examines central stakeholders' and tourism SMEs and MEs first responses to the pandemic. Similar to previous crises and disasters, the case of COVID-19 demonstrates the reliance on top-down management approaches, notably governmental compensation schemes and subsidies. Given the magnitude of the impacts related to travel bans and border closures, response mechanisms remained largely insufficient. The media reviews reveals that in the first months after the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, Norwegian tourism SMEs and MEs have responded in five ways that are to some extent time-displaced yet continue simultaneous: (1) early response to business survival, (2) smaller operational changes, (3) employee layoff and bankruptcies, (4) innovation and alternative income sources and (5) gradual reopening. The Norwegian tourism recovery will strongly rely on domestic tourism which requires a reorientation of communication strategies and Norwegianization (Fornorsking) of product development and innovation. Some Norwegian destinations have already demonstrated that high dependability on international tourists and often disintegrated tourism development may threaten sustainability and prosperity of local communities, and post-COVID-19 recovery strategies will be needed that mitigate the dependence on international markets, mono-seasons or tourism as a mono-industry.

The growing tensions related to overtourism and its influences, such as environmental harm to nature and residents' well-being, loss of authenticity and visitors' satisfaction, have triggered a rethinking of destination marketing strategies. Many destinations consider stricter measures to cope with this situation. Among others, demarketing initiatives, which aim at discouraging demand, are discussed as an alternative strategic orientation. Demarketing is not a new concept, but in complex tourism destinations with many attractions, stakeholders and tourists, its potential remains mostly unexplored. This chapter presents findings from two tourism destinations: one on a national scale, New Zealand, and one on a regional scale, the Lofoten Islands, Norway. Our results show that destination demarketing mix strategies are emphasised by both destinations. In an overtourism situation, it is surprising that general demarketing has limited relevance. Instead, we find evidence for a mix of mainly selective demarketing, but also synchromarketing initiatives (redistributing demand spatially and temporally) and counter-marketing efforts (tourists' code of conduct). Decisions related to the implementation of a demarketing mix depend not only on destination management in general, but also on long-term, sustainability-oriented and dynamic processes where stakeholders negotiate how they can adjust visitor demands. We refer to such strategic work as ‘Stakeholder Integrated Demarketing Approach’ (SIDA). The chapter provides an original contribution to tourism academia and practices while opening avenues for future research, particularly with reference to a demarketing mix strategy and the feasibility of SIDA in times when demarketing could develop as a tool to mitigate overtourism.