Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
• Many tourism and recreation geographers are now operating in non-geography
departments or in the private sector.
Unlike some areas of tourism research, such as politics and public policy, for example
(Hall 1994; Hall and Jenkins 1995), there is some government support for research and
consulting on the geography of tourism and recreation. However, such research support
tends to be given to the analysis of spatial patterns of tourist flows and issues of
infrastructure location rather than areas of applied geographical research in gender and
social impacts that may produce unwanted political results. Indeed, even support for
research on the environmental impacts on tourism has the potential to produce politically
contestable results, particularly if the results are not seen as supportive of industry
interests. Therefore, funding for tourism and recreation research will tend to reinforce the
more conservative spatial science aspects of the geography of tourism and recreation at
the expense of more fundamental analysis which would have a greater capacity to extend
the theoretical contributions of the subdiscipline. Despite the apparent lack of interest in
studies of the broader dimensions of tourism by government and industry, and the
community conflicts that occur in relation to tourism development, it is important to
recognise that such research may be of an extremely practical nature. The results of such
research may help facilitate and improve tourism planning through an increased
understanding of decision-making processes (e.g. P.E.Murphy 1985), and help maintain
the long-term viability of tourist destinations.
Despite the extensive growth of research on tourism and recreation in the 1980s and
1990s, many people still do not regard tourism as a serious subject of study, often
equating it with booking a holiday at a travel agency or learning how to pour a beer.
Indeed, research on tourism is often seen as frivolous. The observation of Matthews
(1983:304) that 'at a typical American university, a political scientist with a scholarly
interest in tourism might be looked upon as dabbling in frivolity—not as a serious scholar
but as an opportunist looking for a tax-deductible holiday', holds almost universal
applicability. Similar to V.L.Smith's (1977:1) observations on the anthropology of
tourism in the 1970s, it is a topic that still appears to be thought by many in the discipline
as unworthy of consideration by the serious geography scholar. Indeed, L.S.Mitchell
(1997), a noted scholar within tourism and recreation geography, in a personal
communication following a discussion on RTSnet (the interest newsgroup of the
recreation, tourism and sport speciality group of the Association of American
Geographers) regarding the position of recreation and tourism in American geography,
argued that
Recreation geography, has never been a valued member of the
establishment, because, it is believed, it is impossible to be serious about
individuals and groups having fun. Note the subtitle of the feminist
oriented tourism conference being held in California this month ('Tourism
is not about having fun'). In spite of the fact that tourism is the number
one economic activity in the world, that recreation (especially passive
recreation) takes up a large portion of the population's time, and that sport
is almost a religion for many in this country, geographers who study these
phenomena are not highly regarded.
