Tourism science

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article or section needs revision: Reads like an essay, not an encyclopedia article. Sometimes unspeakable stylistically.
Please help to improve it , and then remove this flag.

The tourism science exists as a neologism only since the beginning of the 1990s -years. The term is not yet established and it is controversial whether there is a separate tourism science or whether one should not speak of tourism science with different explanatory approaches or sub-sciences such as tourism sociology, tourism history, tourism geography or tourism economics.

Tourism science

The term tourism science appears new, but it is not intended to create the impression that a scientific discussion about tourism has only taken place since the beginning of the 1990s. As early as 1929 , Robert Glücksmann had dealt with questions of tourism in his Berlin institute (see history of tourism research ). Glücksmann is known today as a co-founder of modern tourism science. However, even after the war, tourism science was on shaky legs; Critics doubted that there could even be an independent tourism science.

The critics mostly start with the concept of tourism - and logically quite justified. In fact, science would stand on weak legs if it were not able to support a perfectly delineated object of knowledge filled with a life of its own (Hunziker). But E. Spatt also dealt with the subject of tourism as a science in 1975 and came to the conclusion that this question can only be answered in terms of the object of knowledge. Because in the object of knowledge the entire lived and experienced facts of a realm of existence are united, as it were, as far as they can be classified according to uniform points of view. It was not until the beginning of the 1990s that tourism science began to become dissatisfied with itself, became sensitive to its limitations and looked for ways that would lead to a more broadly based tourism science (cf. Spode). Some authors even headlined: "Tourism and thus also its teaching have had their day, are no longer modern and no longer adequate" (cf. M. Schäfer). Tourism science at that time was characterized by a strong economic perspective, since several scientific disciplines of tourism were now taking on, it was time for further development. The development of today's tourism science could begin.

Establishment of tourism science

In general, in tourism, especially in Germany, the continuing lack of science is criticized, while tourism science and research has a high priority worldwide in the academic and social field, tourism science is clearly underrepresented in the German research landscape. The first university research and teaching in tourism took place in Berlin around 1930. At German universities, tourism science today functions mainly as a branch of business administration (Uni Lüneburg, Uni Rostock, Uni Dresden, Uni Trier) or geography (Uni Paderborn, Uni Greifswald, Uni Trier, Uni Eichstätt, Uni Kiel, Uni Göttingen, Uni Aachen), However, it is mainly taught in a very practice-oriented and application-oriented manner at universities of applied sciences. In 1993 Hahn and Kagelmann published the groundbreaking handbook on tourism science (tourism psychology and sociology). From this point on, the discussion about establishing tourism education as a science (tourism science) took place in Germany.

"Many tourism scientists doubt that it is at all possible to establish a general tourism science based on scientific theory." (Kulinat 2003)

So z. B. According to Nahrstedt , develop tourism science as follows:

  • Tourism research in existing disciplines (e.g. geography of tourism, economics of tourism, history of tourism, etc.)

This development has already taken place, further education courses, e.g. B. Tourism (University of Berlin) or until about 1997 the further education course in tourism science at Bielefeld University were taught in an interdisciplinary manner. This means that several scientific disciplines are involved in tourism education and examine tourism from the perspective of the respective science. B. sociology, psychology, history, economics, law, geography or pedagogy. The "Sustainable Tourism" course was introduced at the Eberswalde University of Applied Sciences , and it is also interdisciplinary.

  • Tourism science: tourism research on the basis of a uniform scientific paradigm for the subject of tourism as an overall phenomenon. This perspective is still up for discussion. Although many scientists submit suggestions for a paradigm, no paradigm has yet been found that would be accepted by all scientists or compatible with their scientific disciplines.

Krippendorf says: More qualified research is urgently needed, but we do not need our own tourism science or tourism science. The methods of other scientific disciplines are quite sufficient to study tourism. Hansruedi Müller also speaks out against an independent tourism science, because this could only exist where tourism in its entirety or in individual problem areas has very specific aspects that could not be analyzed with the help of other sciences. (See Müller: Freizeit und Tourismus 2002. ). Tourism science can only exist if it is:

  • by isolating the concept (with precisely definable, measurable, problem-oriented and time-dependent definitions) or
  • by isolating it from the system-theoretical approach (summary of the scientifically relevant elements and features) to be distinguished from other sciences

Since these requirements for tourism science are currently not yet met, Müller's definition of tourism science is as follows:

We understand tourism science as an applied science. We draw the foundations for the findings from various fields of knowledge. (See Müller: Freizeit und Tourismus. An introduction to theory and politics. 2002.).

What we find today at technical colleges and universities is a so-called additive tourism science, in which the individual scientific disciplines are largely unconnected.

Pompl criticizes the fact that such a tourism science is not a science of its own, but rather, from an epistemological point of view, a classificatory generic term that requires its own paradigm (worldview) for the establishment and existence of its own tourism science.

One aim should be to establish tourism science as an independent academic institution (faculty, institute) etc. Since the problems of tourism affect a large number of different scientific disciplines, the integrative power of such an institution would have to be incredibly large (cf. Meder 1999). As a science that can potentially be combined, Meder names: Economics (business administration and economics), geography, history, sociology, leisure education and cultural work, general time and leisure science, biology and ecology, transport science, political science, psychology, law , health science, media and design science, information science and logistics, as well as civil engineering and architectural science (cf. Meder 1999). It can be doubted whether this list is already complete. B. cultural studies, medicine or spatial planning make a contribution to tourism science. For Meder, the question now arises as to how all these disciplines can be combined or even a (studyable) course under the label "Tourism Science" can be implemented. For Meder, the problem of tourism science is not the organizer, nor the traveler, nor the trip itself; the problem is the common cause of our way of life in the mode of mobility.

For tourism science as a “science”, separate methods and a paradigm would have to be developed, but this will probably take a few more years. Therefore, there is no such thing as a “real tourism science”, just a so-called additive tourism science. The existing scientific disciplines must be sufficient to analyze tourism. However, if there are problems and questions that cannot be solved with the instruments of the other sciences, a separate tourism science would be necessary. So tourism is not yet a science, but a research object or area of ​​research.

Tourism science disciplines

There could actually be a question mark behind this heading, because, as is so often the case, there is disagreement among tourism researchers on this question. For the qualified psychologist Heinz Hahn , tourism science is an integrative science, not a constitutive science that is supported by four central disciplines . Hahn names sociology , economics , geography and pedagogy as these central disciplines (cf. Hahn in Tourismuswissenschaft 1994). According to Hahn, psychology is only an auxiliary science to tourism science. A year earlier (1993) in the book Tourism Psychology and Sociology, also published by Hahn together with Kagelmann, eight disciplines were named as disciplines of tourism science, these are; historical tourism research, tourism anthropology, tourism sociology, tourism economics, geography of leisure and tourism, cultural anthropology of tourism, tourism education, leisure education. The leisure and tourism researcher Opaschowski also has his own idea of ​​tourism science, so his graphic "Tourism Science at a Glance" consists of:

  • Tourism terminology / tourism economics
  • Tourism theory / tourism criticism
  • Tourism history
  • Tourism psychology
  • Tourism analysis
  • Tourism forecasts
  • Tourism policy / tourism ethics

According to Opaschowski, tourism economics, tourism history, tourism psychology and tourism policy / ethics can be named as basic disciplines for tourism science. Why does Opaschowski leave out the spatially relevant aspects of tourism or leisure and tourism geography in this edition of his book? In the first edition (the graphic was still called Tourism Research at a Glance), he added that other interdisciplinary problems and issues of sociology and economy, ecology and geography are in view, but are not treated in isolation (cf. 1989). This question cannot be answered here. Tourism researcher W. Freyer names six constitutive disciplines in his models of tourism science , these are economics , political science , psychology , sociology , ecology and geography . These disciplines form the basis of tourism science and are therefore briefly described.

Economics (tourism economics : micro and macro economics of tourism, business administration of tourism )

  • Supply and demand of and for tourism products
  • Effects of cross-border travel
  • Gross and net value added in tourism
  • Calculations on economic effects
  • Cost-benefit analyzes
  • Analysis of the tourist offer - accessible tourism, senior tourism, travel for all - (cf. Wilken 2016)
  • Analysis of tourism demand / markets
  • Methods of Marketing and Management

Sociology (Tourism Sociology )

  • Transfer of the results obtained in general sociology, e.g. B. about the nature of the social, about the sociality of humans, about social structures and processes on tourism. (Vester: The social organization of tourism. In: Tourismus-Journal. 2nd year, 1998)
  • Description and explanation of the social and cultural phenomena and causes of tourism. (Vester, article in the sociology of tourism in Hahn / Kagelmann p. 36)
  • Sociology examines tourism in its social dimension, such as group activities, social orders, social values ​​(and their change), organization, bureaucracy, etc. (Freyer, Basics of the Tourism Industry for the Cultural Tourism Script of the Fern-Universität Hagen)
  • social tax factors of tourism
  • Travel behavior of soci-demographic groups
  • Draft travel motive theories

According to Bachleitner (tourism sociology or the sociology of travel), tourism sociology has the primary task:

  • to identify and analyze the social framework conditions that are decisive for the genesis of tourism
  • to examine the effects of travel on travelers (= travel socialization processes), those who have traveled and those who work in the service sector, as well as to shed light on the resulting interactive processes on the cultural, spatial and temporal levels (= cultural, social, economic and ecological tourismification processes); this results in total
  • to accelerate the development of theory, especially in connection with the differentiation of the tourism system, since the explanatory approaches for tourism through its concrete manifestations should be more promising than just through individual motivations (escape theories vs. exploration theories)

Psychology (Tourism Psychology )

  • Travel motifs (influences, groups of motifs, ...)
  • Travel decisions (tax factors, process)
  • Travel satisfaction (rating, ratings)
  • Tourists' perception of the environment
  • Tourism psychology can and must contribute something to the analysis of the humane, socio-cultural and economic conditions for mobility
  • Concepts e.g. B. Crowding, Behavior Setting, Territoriality and their applicability to tourism
  • Travel as a means of symbolic self-completion

Geography ( tourism geography )

  • Geography records the spatial impact of tourism
  • Evaluation of landscapes, climatology
  • spatial requirements for recreation and tourism
  • spatial differentiation of the offer (leisure or tourism attraction factors)
  • spatially differentiated distribution of demand (leisure or relaxation seekers)
  • reachability
  • Source and destination areas
  • spatial effects of tourism

According to Reinhard Bachleitner (Sociology of Tourism or the Sociology of Travel), geography occupies an intermediate position in the meaning positioning of social science research efforts, as it combines both cultural-geographic and socio-geographic approaches with space-specific and human-ecological aspects in tourism.

Ecology (tourism ecology )

  • Environmental pollution from tourism
  • soft tourism, ecological tourism, sustainable tourism, tourism with insight
  • Environmental design of tourism
  • Sustainable tourism

Political Science (Tourism Policy )

  • Explanations for political activities in tourism
  • Tourism promotion
  • Regulations in national travel
  • Creation of the infrastructure and the framework for tourism

In the meantime, cultural studies are also trying to establish themselves in the field of tourism studies. So was z. B. in the book Travel and Everyday Life, Contributions to Cultural Studies Tourism Research tries to assume an independent contribution of cultural studies in the field of tourism research , which is now carried out by many disciplines. H. Müllermeister also makes the following considerations in his article The contribution of cultural anthropology to tourism science. One of the common objections to tourism science is the argument that tourism is a complex subject of research that different experts from different disciplines have to deal with, each with their own tools and methods. For a single scientist, a tourism scientist who inevitably has to be a universal dilettante, the matter is far too complicated (cf. Müllermeister 1998). This argument sounds impressive, but according to Müllermeister it is not suitable for convincing an ethnologist. Because a folklorist must also deal with different peoples, their economic methods, the legal system, art, etc. Could the tourism scientist do the same? The cultural-scientific approach to tourism research is not new. As early as 1942, Hunziker and Krapf pursued a broad cultural-scientific research into tourism (see history of tourism science).

Paradigm of a tourism science

The historian and sociologist Hasso Spode (in On the Way to a Theory of Tourism 1998) has the following requirements, which must be met for tourism science to be established as a separate science:

His considerations are based on formal requirements that macro theories would have to meet, so they would have to:

  • be holistic, d. that is, they must have the potential ability to grasp social, economic and psychological aspects as a synthesis.
  • be dynamic, d. That is, to make the change in appearance explainable
  • be comparative .

The co-founder of modern tourism science, Paul Bernecker, considers the basic research in tourism to be completed, but Spode cannot share this opinion. According to Spode, basic research is only possible after a recognized scientific paradigm has been derived. But to do this, the macro-theory would first have to be operationalized by selecting basic questions and basic assumptions / axioms, and checking these for their logical consistency. Measurement methods would have to be developed and derived hypotheses formed. If all of this does not happen, then, according to Spode, tourism education remains an art education. An art teaching only provides theories of short range that can be understood as "instructions for use". While science uses theories to ask why questions, art studies want to answer how questions with the help of theories.

The development of a uniform tourism science contrasts with the isolated analysis of the individual disciplines with the phenomenon of tourism. Various scientific disciplines analyze tourism from the point of view of the respective parent science, there is no generally accepted frame of reference in which the knowledge acquired through individual research is put into a theoretical context. The previous occupation with tourism is therefore almost always a perspective science. B. Sociology the travel behavior of socio-demographic groups, geography measures the spatial impact of tourism and economics deals with supply and demand of or for tourism products, etc.

In order to legitimize itself as a scientific discipline, every science needs at least two things: a definable and delimitable research subject and an interest in knowledge (P. Schimany: Tourism Sociology ... a preliminary interim balance sheet ). So far, however, it has not yet been possible to establish tourism science as an independent discipline, because although there is a common research object (travel or the phenomenon of change of location and the related relationships between people, institutions, etc.), none of the discipline's own Method before. Tourism science lacks the definition of a common scientific worldview (paradigm) with which all disciplines can identify. So z. B. Pompl proposed the application of systems theory to tourism as such a paradigm. Kulinat also sees systems theory as a possible tourism theory that takes into account all aspects of tourism as far as possible (Kulinat: Tourism Demand : Motives and Theories. P. 102). Unfortunately, it has not yet been sufficiently possible to establish system theory for general tourism science in terms of scientific theory (cf. Kulinat).

The sociologist Vester also suggests systems theory and several other theories of tourism, but none can satisfy as a general paradigm. W. Freyer 1995 suggested the concept of travel, but this paradigm would not encompass tourism in its entirety. In Freyer's approach, a large part of the tourism environment is excluded (e.g. hospitality industry, entertainment businesses). Meder (1999, p. 120) sees the entire complexity of the “tourism” market sector “only in the unity of the problem of mobility in leisure time or with reference to leisure time” (cf. M. Schäfer 2003). This definition includes two of the essential components (mobility and leisure) of tourism, but forgets the people and institutions involved in tourism.

Nahrstedt proposes to develop a paradigm of tourism science based on the tourism definition or the tourism concept of the WTO. Nahrstedt's suggestion “a person changing location for a certain purpose” is far too imprecise, because it only covers the person traveling, the tourist, and leaves out the relationships at the holiday destination. Wegner-Spöring (1991) finally sees a “paradigm shift in the direction of quality of experience.” So both the proposals for a paradigm in tourism science and the conventional theoretical offers (cf. Vester 1999) are inadequate to explain the phenomena of tourism and understand them to make (M. Schäfer 2003).

Current state of tourism science

The tourist knowledge community agrees on one thing: In order to adequately deal with the totality of the phenomenon, tourism as a scientific research area must be dealt with in a multidisciplinary manner and must not be left unilaterally to individual disciplines (M. Schäfer: The path to a tourism science ). The following positions in tourism science are still being discussed:

Additive tourism science

The issues of tourism are seen as sub-disciplines of other branches of science.

Different sub-disciplines analyze tourism in the respective tradition of the parent discipline. From the point of view of the respective sub-science, the tourism phenomenon is analyzed with different questions and objectives. No independent methods are developed and there is no uniform object of knowledge. With additive tourism theory models, the considerations of the respective individual sciences are combined or added together to form an overall model. In terms of scientific theory, this approach can be assigned to reductionism (cf. Freyer: Tourismus-Ökonomie or Ökonomie des Tourismus ).

Tourism theory as a separate branch of science

The essential elements and peculiarities of tourism serve as a starting point for an independent tourism science. This includes the temporary change of location of people and the relationships to people and institutions at the holiday or destination or the change of location, the time aspect, the motives for the trip, or the overall phenomenon of tourism. Tourism science is an "umbrella science", the phenomenon of tourism is analyzed against this background and the scientific disciplines involved make a contribution to "general tourism theory" as so-called "auxiliary science". This independent tourism science represents a kind of “supra-” or “meta-theory” with a uniform method, which also leads to the corresponding formulation of independent sub-disciplines of tourism science such as B. Tourism sociology, tourism psychology or tourism economics (cf. Freyer, Tourismus-Ökonomie or Ökonomie des Tourismus).

Development of tourism science

With the founding of the German Society for Tourism Science and the INIT Research Institute for Interdisciplinary Tourism Studies at the University of Salzburg, a merging of the individual disciplines into a multidisciplinary tourism science can be recognized.

The German Society for Tourism Science is an association of representatives from universities, technical colleges and other tourism science associations. The goals include B. to contribute to the scientific examination of questions of tourism and to the establishment of an interdisciplinary tourism science.

The INIT consists of an association of cultural sociologists, communication scientists, psychologists and historians who have set themselves the goal of comprehending tourism holistically and participating in the conception and development of 'sustainable' tourism.

At the University of Lüneburg, the professorship “applied and empirical tourism science” was filled or created with Prof. Wöhler in the cultural studies department. Because this university had recognized that the dynamics of tourism could no longer be traced back to one aspect. Regardless of which tourism-related objects and phenomena are discussed or analyzed, economic, political, ecological and sociocultural (interaction) conditions quickly come into focus. With the professorship “Empirical and Applied Tourism Science”, the institutional attempt, unique in the German-speaking area, is undertaken to if not to absorb this complexity, at least to bundle it. A sociological and business management (Prof. Dr. Wöhler) as well as a cultural and business management (employee) training or competence can be used to fulfill this task. Primarily in research, but also in teaching, “Empirical and Applied Tourism Science” wants to show that tourism cannot be one-sidedly or closely analyzed and / or designed (see the website of the University of Lüneburg).

In addition, there is a growing interest in tourism in sociology, folklore and history. A historical archive on tourism (HAT) at the Technical University of Berlin is an important point of contact, particularly for interdisciplinary "historical tourism research" (Hasso Spode) .

From these examples it can be seen that interdisciplinary tourism research is already taking place in cooperation with several disciplines. If tourism research were carried out on the basis of a uniform scientific paradigm, one could speak of a “real” tourism science.

literature

  • Marc Sölter: Tourism Science .
  • H.-P. Burmeister, (Ed.): On the way to a theory of tourism. 1998.
  • W. Nahrstedt, M. Piwodda, Th. Vodde (Hrsg.): Tourism science - practice and theory in dialogue. Documentation 1st Bielefeld Tourism Colloquium, 1994.
  • H. Hahn, HJ Kagelmann (ed.): Tourism psychology and tourism sociology. A Guide to Tourism Science. 1993.
  • Walter Hunziker: Present-day tasks in modern tourism science. In: Tourism Yearbook. 2 1954.
  • Kramer, Lutz: Travel and Everyday Life. Contributions to cultural tourism research.
  • Pompl: Tourism science between paradigm search and coalition.
  • Hansruedi Müller: Leisure and Tourism. An introduction to theory and politics. 9. expanded and updated version. Research Institute for Leisure and Tourism at the University of Bern, Bern 2002.
  • Hasso Spode: Prolegomena to a Historical Anthropology of Tourism. In C. Cantauw: work, leisure, travel. The subtle differences in everyday life.
  • Hasso Spode: History of Tourism as a Research Subject . In: Tourism and Development in the Alpine Region, Innsbruck 2003.
  • Ernst Spatt: General Tourism Studies. 1975.
  • Voyage. Travel and Tourism Research Yearbook. 1997-2011.
  • Bachleitner, Kagelmann, Keul (eds.): The tourist that saw through. Work on tourism research 1998 .
  • Meder: The unity of tourism and tourism science. In: Spektrum Freizeit. 1999, vol. 21.
  • Margit Schäfer: The way to a tourism science. In: Spektrum Freizeit. 25 2003.
  • Margit Schäfer: The Responsibility of a Multidisciplinary Tourism Science - The Paradigm of Sustainable Tourism Development.
  • Master miller: civilization and mobility. The contribution of cultural anthropology to tourism science. In: Bensberger Protocols. 1998.
  • Freyer: Tourism Economics or Tourism Economics. In: Fischer, Laesser: Theory and Practice of Tourism and Transport Management in Changing Values.
  • Freyer: Tourism, introduction to tourism economics. 1995.
  • Freyer: Tourism and Science. In: Feldmann, Tourism Opportunity for Germany as a Business Location.
  • Walter Freyer: Tourism Economics or Economics of Tourism - The contribution of economics to the theory of tourism. In: Fischer, Laesser: Theory and Practice of the Tourism and Transport Industry in Changing Values .
  • Harald A. Friedl: Tourism ethics. Theory and practice of environmentally and socially compatible travel . Munich, Vienna, Profil Verlag, 2002.
  • Harald A. Friedl: Cybernetic Tourism Ethics: Future-Oriented Instrument of Sustainable Tourism Management? In: Egger, R .; Herdin, T. (eds.) (2007). Tourism. Challenge. Future. Salzburg: Lit-Verlag, pp. 561-586, Salzburg.
  • Bachleitner, Schimany: Boundless Society - Boundless Tourism?
  • Bieger: Tourism theory.
  • Vester: Tourism theory.
  • Cuisine: Tourism Demand: Motives and Theory. In: Becker, Hopfinger, Steinecke: Geography of leisure and tourism.
  • University of Lüneburg: EMPAT.
  • Spode: How no theory-based tourism science emerged 50 years ago. In: Bachleitner, Kagelmann, Keul: The tourist seen through. 1998.
  • Spode: Tourismology? On the role of historical tourism research in the scientific landscape . In: Oppl, Scheutz (ed.): Fernweh und Stad t, Innsbruck 2018.
  • Udo Wilken: Challenges in the design and marketing of barrier-free tourism. In: Journal for Tourism Science , 2016, Volume 8, issue. 1, pp. 145-155.
  • KH Wöhler: Social science tourism research in the pre-paradigmatic state. In: Bachleitner, Kagelmann, Keul: The tourist seen through. 1998.

Web links

Wiktionary: Tourism science  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations