‘I’m not your toy’: rejecting a tourism boycott

3 Travel Boycotts, Ethical Consumption and Destination Communities: Expanding the Morality of Neighbourliness

“…Friedman (1999: 4) defined boycott as "the attempt by one or more parties to achieve certain objectives by urging individual consumers to refrain from making selected purchases". The boycott phenomenon has been widely studied in the social sciences but has only recently become a subject of inquiry in tourism (Seyfi & Hall, 2020;Seyfi et al, 2021;Shaheer et al, 2018;2019;Shepherd, 2021), although it had previously been discussed in relation to work on the politics of tourism (Richter, 1989). Individuals, civil society organisations and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are increasingly involved in supporting boycotts in order to change institutions, organisations or societal situations that are seen as ethically, ecologically, or politically disagreeable (Rössel & Schenk, 2018).…”

“…For instance, the study of Yousaf et al (2021) on the #BoycottMurree campaign showed how campaign momentum on social media affected Murree which is a popular tourist destination in Pakistan. This is also especially evident in the case of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaigners pushing for a boycott of Israel's hosting of the Eurovision Song Contest 2019 and accusing Israel of exploiting the artistic event to whitewash its human rights violations against Palestinians (Morrison, 2022;Shepherd, 2021). Nonomura (2017) argued that owing to increased political engagement thanks to social networks, many individuals have developed a greater awareness of their agency and active position as consumer citizens in society.…”

“…He further continued that visitors who disregarded a suggested boycott of Myanmar emphasised the advantages of their tourism to Burmese residents, the transforming nature of their interactions with locals and the chance tourism afforded them to demonstrate their sympathy with the Burmese people. Tourism guidebooks such as Lonely Planet and websites such as Responsible Travel argue that it is possible to travel very responsibly in destinations with poor ethical records and argue that visitors to Myanmar may visit and not support the regime as long as they travel "responsibly" (Shepherd, 2021). Radzik (2017) argued that boycotting implies "damage to innocents", in which third parties are economically or socially penalised for government policies over which they have little influence.…”

“…As a result of such processes, and the various meanings that are associated with travel, for many tourism has become recognised as a global phenomenon with substantial justice implications (e.g., Higgins-Desbiolles, 2020;Mowforth & Munt, 2015). Some argue that as tourists develop a greater sense of civic responsibility or have become more politically conscious, so the number of boycotts increases (Shaheer et al, 2018;2019;Shepherd, 2021). However, while from a social justice perspective such a situation would be laudable, it must also be treated with caution as the increase in the number of boycotts may be the result of social media growth rather than a real increase in the number of people that care enough about an issue to make it a boycott action (Seyfi et al, 2021).…”

Legality of Political and Ethical Consumerism in Tourism

“…For example, a call to boycott travelling to a particular destination addresses the source market due to personal and social proximity. Still, it harms tourism activities in the destination, without having a geographical proximity requirement (Shepherd, 2021). Given this geographic discrepancy and its impact on a market definition, it is not always possible that claims can be brought to court (United Brands v Commission, 1976).…”