Exploring the nexus between sustainable tourism governance, resilience and complexity research

Abstract

Governance and complexity have increasingly become subjects of interest within research on sustainable tourism. Governance has been marked by a turn to more corporatist and networked policymaking structures. At the same time, the use of the concept of complexity in research on tourism destinations and governance is gaining momentum in an effort to address the links in increasingly networked systems as well as the interrelatedness of the multiple features of a tourist destination. Meanwhile, resilience has emerged as a new buzzword in research on sustainable development and governance which denotes the ability of a destination to cope with and adapt to change. This article reviews the literature on destination governance to identify critical issues and trends, and discusses the relevance of complexity approaches. Evolutionary studies and research on resilience in a sustainability context are becoming part of this discussion. The review sheds light on the limitations and merits of each of these concepts, as well as on their nexus. The article concludes with some key areas for future research on destination governance. The aim of the review is to contribute to conceptual clarity and to advance the application of complexity approaches in research on destination governance.

A Tourist’s Gaze on Local Tourism Governance: The Relationship among Local Tourism Governance and Brand Equity, Tourism Attachment for Sustainable Tourism

“…In other words, governance means a state in which various actors in the region build a network and jointly participate in decision making and execution at a horizontal level through interactions based on trust and cooperation, and the actors include members such as related organizations in the region, expert groups such as universities, and interest groups [22]. In addition, it should not be understood as a simple process, and the necessity of a policy based on a cooperative understanding achieved through diverse and wide-ranging participation has been explained [23].…”

Island Tourism: Vulnerable or Resistant to Overtourism?

“…If control is vested in a local or regional island authority, the introduction of mitigation measures has much greater potential to be implemented than when such power belongs with other, generally external, agencies. Given that the problems of overtourism are primarily and usually experienced at the local level, which may be a whole island in some cases, then it is logical to argue that solutions are most likely to be found at the local level and it is at that level that actions should be taken [58]. For example, the Gili islands in Indonesia face significant problems managing overtourism which is compounded by the larger controlling government body of Lombok having a growth-oriented stance [59].…”

Paradigm Of New Institutional Administrations in The Governance and Institutionalization of Marine Tourism in Payangan, Indonesia

“…Tourists' interest in marine tourism in Indonesia, according to OECD [9], is due to several factors, including: First, biodiversity underwater: Indonesia is an archipelago consisting of thousands of islands with incredibly rich and beautiful underwater biodiversity [10]. Second, extraordinary natural beauty: Besides underwater biodiversity, Indonesia also has beautiful beaches with stunning scenery [11] [12]. Third, unique culture: Apart from its beautiful nature, Indonesia also has a very unique and interesting culture to explore [13] [14].…”

“…The phenomenon of weaknesses in Payangan does not seem to be solely due to poor governance, as is generally the case in marine tourism destinations [18] [19]. There is another factor, namely institutional issues that are not yet ready to accept the reality that Payangan is currently a marine tourism destination, resulting in the domination or monopoly of a small group and village government officials who disregard the interests of the local community in general [11][20] [21].…”