zijt.zenonpub.

com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

PLATFORMS: A SHIFT IN THE

APPROACH OF TOURISM FROM
1950S TO THE 21 ST CENTURY
Malathi Iyer1
Recognizing the economic influence of tourism, the positive views of tourism can be found in
many publications of the 1950s and 60s (Jafari 1990) identifying tourism for the reduction in
deficits, development of the financial base of the host’s destination and reducing the
inequalities.

Many studies conducted, particularly from the local’s point of view have not been in favour of
tourism development, particularly when issues such as cultural deterioration, social pressures
and environmental degradation are taken note.

According to Hall (1996) “People seek the economic and employment benefits of tourism but
they are concerned about the negative impact it may have on their culture and many seek to
control access to their environment.”

The effects of tourism development are often questioned with respect to the following (Dogan
1989, Guthunzz and Krosigk1996, Madrigal 1993, Mansfield and Ginosar 1994, Nickerson
1996, UNEP 1996, Pruthi 2006, ICRT 2008):

 environmental degradation
 commercialization of traditions and folklores
 Economic leakage due to dependence on imports
 drain of tourism revenue to outsiders
 Prevalence of feelings of scarcity due to financial gaps between local residents and
tourists
 drain of manpower from the traditional sectors
 Decision making is mainly based between large tourism firms and government agencies

1
Dr Malathi Iyer, Associate Professor, Head of Economics Department Vivek College of
Commerce, Mumbai-400104
1

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

 The tourist industry’s poor image as a low wage payer employer

 low status of tourism jobs and
 Seasonal Industry.

There has been change of views on tourism and different sentiments and study findings
expressed by Jafari (1990) that, the views on tourism have evolved from advocacy in the 1960s,
to cautionary in the 1970s, adaptancy in the 1980s and knowledge based in 1990s and new
platforms sustainability and ethics in 2000s.

The platforms have common characteristics and parts of the earlier platforms can still be found
today. The views represent shifts in the search for correct approaches to tourism development.

Importance was originally given to the economic significance of tourism (Advocacy) followed
by the pressures that tourism exerts on culture and environment (Cautionary) and later to the
development of an alternative to the subsidized, mass, highly commercialized and firm
structure of tourism (Adaptancy), a holistic approach (Sustainability), prescriptive for
community involvement and local development (Ethics).

First Platform: According to Jafari, two decades fifties and sixties were categorized by an
"advocacy platform," in which holiday business was identified as the model, smokeless
business. Therefore, the more tourism was developed the better and mass tourism was the best
option.

Second Platform: The era of seventies the tourism focus was “cautionary platform," agreed
by many scholars who regarded this sector in general as a Trojan horse proficient of underrating
the environmental, economic and socio-cultural integrity of destinations. (Jafari1990)

Third Platform: The next rational step was described by the "adaptancy" platform of the
1980s. Home stays and farm tourism are two examples of this type of tourism activity.

Mass tourism was believed to be on a big scale, outwardly controlled, high leakage and focused
in high-density tourist areas, alternative tourism was supposed to be minor, locally controlled
and encouraging to the creation of connections with other segments of the local economy and
spread within low-density local regions. Where mass tourism was considered to be inherently
unsustainable, alternative tourism was thought to be fundamentally sustainable. (Clarke 1997

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

PLATFORMS OF TOURISM

Decades Platform Platform Ideal types Focus of Planning

Numbers public
Approach
sector
1960s First Advocacy Sustained mass Foreign Physical
tourism exchange development
earnings
1970s Second Cautionary Unsustainable mass Employment Marketing
tourism and and
promotion promotion
1980s Third Adaptancy Deliberate alternative Economic Community
tourism multiplier approach
1990s Fourth Knowledge Sustained mass Sustainable Integrative
based tourism/circumstantial development approach
alternative tourism
2000s Fifth sustainability Empower Decision Public
communities making participation
2000s Sixth Ethics Community Social Local
involvement policies development
Source Compiled from Getz (1987), Jafari (1990), Din (1997), Weaver (1999), Kaufman
(1997) and Macbeth (2005).

The Fourth Platform: A change in attitude was the emergence in the 1990s of a knowledge-
based platform that attempts to apply a more cautious approach and move beyond the platforms
that were based on principles of the past. In this outline, the assessment of a particular tourist
product as good or bad does not depend on scale, but rather on the success of the management
practices that are applied to the situations of each individual destination.

Hence, small- scale alternative tourism may not be feasible and unmanageable under certain
settings, while comprehensive tourism may be workable under other conditions. Once this
possibility of sustainable mass tourism is acknowledged then there is no longer any reason for
opposing that mass tourism and ecotourism are inequitable.

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

The Fifth Platform: Sustainable tourism is the jingle of the time and is ‘‘attached’’ to
government strategies throughout the world. Sustainable development has changed the political
discussions and has been a part of increasing debate at all levels of environmental social
policies and theory. At the same time, Jacobs (1999) sees it as a advantage that Sustainable
development can appeal to the green development and the traditionalists at the same time. It is
important to validate the complexity, popularity and the significance of the concepts included
by Sustainable development that Jafari’s theory included a fifth platform, one that would
eventually include sustainability as a pattern.

Sustainable development includes four facets when combined into plan and progress the
decision making provides a holistic approach to the question of how societies should develop
(Macbeth 1994).

FIGURE 1.4 ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

SUSTAINABILITY
•Ecology
•Social
•Economy
•Cultural

1. Ecological Sustainability needs that development be sociable with the self-maintenance

and self-direction of ecological procedures, biological diversity and biological resources.

2. Social Sustainability a prerequisite that development increases people’s control over

their lives and that maintains and strengthens community distinctiveness and unity.

3. Cultural Sustainability requires that expansion preserves and fosters the cultural
significance and practice of the cultures in which it takes place.

4. Economic Sustainability requires that development be economically effective and that

the benefits and costs arising from it be shared equitably.

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

Common to each dimension and underlying the idea of sustainability is essential and this
ethical position has clear and multifaceted outcomes for decision making at all levels of society.
These four scopes form a concept that, as Jacobs (1999) and Duffy (2002) assert, is widely
accepted as a general or framework level of analysis.

Ethical positions of what each stakeholder values and how each prioritizes those values. ‘‘As
so often happens, deep political and ethical disagreements make the definition of the concept
[of sustainable development] a contested area’’ (Sachs 1999). Yet, the term sustainability has
already been added to a wide body of exploration and grants that has given it a very high profile.
Sustainable development assumes existence of the human species is important. This is a macro
(or holistic, global) concept that endorses long term approach or perspective, assuming a
realistic quality of living for all people irrespective of race, gender, class, ethnicity, religion,
and so forth.

The Sixth Platform: Jafari’s platforms were in a sequential description of the course of
tourism research and development to signify a study of the way in which scholarship and
research had been loomed. The fifth platform follows from an historical analysis of tourism
grant and as do the other four, describes the state of the discipline. However, the sixth platform
is prescriptive, not descriptive. Tourism, if it is to contribute seriously to any level, needs to
understand its ethical positions. (Macbeth 2005)

The seventh platform: This decade introduces tourism as a Inclusiveness for holistic
economic growth and development

MUTUAL INCLUSIVE AND

UNDERSTANDING, SUSTAINABLE
PEACE AND ECONOMIC
SECURITY GROWTH

SOCIAL
CULTURAL VALUES, INCLUSIVENESS,
DIVERSITY AND EMPLOYMENT AND
HERITAGE POVERTY
REDUCTION

RESOURCE
EFFICIENCY,
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AND
CLIMATE CHANGE

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

Economic growth is connected to tourism sector which has 10% of worlds GDP and 30% of
world exports are contributed by this sector. This is one sector which has the largest
employability and one in every 11 jobs are in tourism all over the world. The economies that
have large population will benefit if tourism sector grows.

Tourism attracts people all over the world it is the vehicle which raises finance for conservation
and protection of historical sites, sanctuaries, wildlife, and restores biodiversity.

Tourism revives the dying art and craft, traditional activities and customs, Empowers
communities and nurtures pride within them. Tourism brings people together by making the
world a global village and is a soft tool of diplomacy.

Hence, there are seven platforms for understanding tourism research, study, policy and
planning: advocacy, cautionary, adaptancy, knowledge-based, sustainability and ethics,
holistic-development platforms. The key point in this model is to ‘‘create’’ a platform that
forces an rendezvous with these fundamental ethical issues. Hopefully, academicians,
government, and experts will each be helped by these platforms, to think about and understand
the nature and implications of their attitudes towards development. Holistic tourism is a minor
introduction to some of the work being done to understand symbiotic model of tourism.

The purport of seven tourism platforms is that a smaller scale locally controlled developmental
model is increasingly idealized as being the most beneficial to the host communities. The main
idea is to promote locally approachable types of development so that it ultimately gives
importance to the conservation of the physical and cultural environment.

But the main limitation of the community driven paradigm is the local’s capability to energize
growth. The search of economic prosperity should not be the only goal to determine in which
way tourism is planned, developed and managed. It is also important to recognize the adverse
effects brought by tourism on environmental economic and social issues, realizing the trade-
offs are unavoidable in the tourism and planning process. (Mathieson and Wall 1982)

Pearce (1990), for example, notes that a community-based approach only addresses local
concerns without giving much emphasis on how communities can effectively market their
products to the wider world and the ways to manage their resources to achieve the maximum
benefits from tourism development.

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

Tourism as an alternative strategy has proven to be effective in improving the remote and
underprivileged regions where their economic base is agriculture. It occurs where
underdeveloped and backward areas have been manipulated locally as tourism attractions.
Archer (1996) stands for continued tourism growth and development in the underprivileged
regions to reduce poverty and enhance the way of life of the resident population.

The immediate challenge, according to Hall (1996), is the degree to which the host
communities demand control over development and voluntarily assume entrepreneurial roles
in the tourism industry. This demands substantial new directions in confirming tourism impact
studies. This is precisely the rationale that Wall (1997) uses to define sustainable development
in the context of tourism as environmentally sensitive and culturally appropriate types of
development, while noting that economic viability is essential to maintain a healthy and a sound
tourism system.

The Global Travel Association Coalition intends to speak with ‘One Voice’ on key issues
shaping the progress of the sector, while encouraging a better understanding of Travel &
Tourism’s role as a driver of economic progress, employment and sustainable development.

Archer. (1996). Sustainable Tourism: an Economist’s Viewpoint. In Briguligo, L. Archer,

Jafari, J. and Wall G. (eds.) Sustainable tourism in islands and small states Issues and policies.
New York, Pinter.

Bhatia, A.K. (2007). Tourism Development: Principles and Practices. New Delhi: Sterling
Publishers Pvt. Ltd.

Butler, R.W. (1975). Tourism as an agent of social change .In Proceedings of the International
Geographical Union’s Working Group on the Geography of Tourism and Recreation. (85–90).
Peterborough, Ontario: Trent University.

Clarke, J. (1997). A Framework of Approaches to Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Sustainable

Tourism, Vol.5, (3) (224-233).

Cooper, C. Fletcher, J. Gilbert, D and Wan Hill S. (1993) Tourism: Principles and practice.
Essex, Longman.

Din, K.H. (1997). Tourism Development: Still in Search of a More Equitable Mode of Local
Involvement. In Cooper, C. and Wan hill, S.(eds),Tourism Development: Environmental and
Community Issues,pp153-162.West Sussex,John Wiley and Sons.

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

Dogan, H. (1989). Forms of adjustment: Socio-cultural impacts of tourism. Annals of Tourism

Research 16 (2), 216–36.

Duffy, R. (2002). A Trip Too Far: Ecotourism, Politics and Exploitation. London:
Earth scan Publications.

Getz, D. (1986). Models of tourism planning: Towards integration of Theory and practice.
Tourism management, March,21-32.

Goodwin. H. (2005).Seasonality: a Responsible Tourism Approach .International care for

responsible tourism.

Gunn, C.A. (1994). Tourism Planning: Basics Concepts, Cases (3rd edition).Washington,
Taylor and Francis.

Guthunzz, U. and Krosigk, F. (1996). Tourism development in Small Island states from Mirab
toTourab. In Briguligo, L, Archer, B. Jafari, J. and Wall g. (eds.) Sustainable tourism in islands
and small states Issues and policies. New York Pinter.

Jacobs. M. (1999). Sustainable development as a contested concept. In A. Dodson (eds )

Fairness and Futurity, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.21-45.

Jafari, J. (1973). ‘Role of Tourism in Socio Economic Transformation of Developing

Countries.

Jafari, J. (1977). Editor’s Page. Annals of Tourism Research, 5(sp. issue), pp 6-11.

Kaufman, M. (1997). Community Power, Grassroots Democracy, and the Transformation of

Social Life. In Community Power and Grassroots Democracy: The transformation of social
life, M. Kaufman and H. D. Alfonso eds. Zed Books, pp. 1-29.

Lieper, N. (1979). The Framework of Tourism: Towards a Definition of Tourism, Tourist and
The Tourist Industry. Annals of Tourism Research 6(4), 390-407.

Macbeth, J. (2005). Towards an Ethics Platform for Tourism .Annals of Tourism Research 32
(4), 962-984.

Madrigal, R.(1993). A tale of Tourism in two cities. Annals of tourism research 20(2), 336-
353.

Mansfield. and Ginosar. O (1994). Determinants of local perceptions and attitudes towards
Tourism development in their locality, Geoforum.25, ( 2) 227-48.

Mathieson, A. and Wall, G. (1982). Tourism: Economic, Physical and Social Impacts .Essex,
Longman Scientific and Technical.
8

Journal of Tourism and Ethos

zijt.zenonpub.com Jan-Jun 2018 ISSN 2581-4958 - Vol I – Issue I

McIntosh, R.W. Goeldner, C.R, andRitchieJ.R.B. (1995).Tourism: Principles, Practices,

philosophies.New York, John Wiley and Sons.

Mill, R.C. and Morrison, A.M. (1992). The Tourism System: An introductory Text (2nd
Edition), Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall.
Nickerson, N. P. (1996). Foundations of Tourism, Englewood, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Pearce, D.G. (1990), Tourism in Ireland: Questions of Scale and Organization. Tourism
Management, June, pp133-151.

Pruthi R.K. (2006). Rural Tourism Challenges and Paradox. New Delhi Rajat publications.

Sachs, I. (1999). “Social Sustainability and Whole Development: Exploring the Dimensions of
Sustainable Development”. In: Becker, E. and Jahn, T. (eds.). Sustainability and the Social
Sciences, London. Zed Books.

Scheyvens, R, R. (2002). Tourism for Development : Empowering communities. Prentice Hall.

Smith, S.L.J. (1988). Defining Tourism: A supply side View. Annals of tourism Research 15
(2), pp.179-190.

Stevens, T.(2002). Sustainable tourism in National Parks and protected areas .An overview,
Scottish natural Heritage.

Stynes, D.J. (1997).Estimating the economic impacts of recreation and tourism. Paper
presented at International Symposium on Human Dimensions in Natural Resource
Management, Belize City.

Theobald, W. (1994). The context Meaning and Scope of Tourism. In Theobald, W. (ed)
Global Tourism: The Next Decade, pp1-19.Oxford, Butterworth Heinemann

Wall, G. (1997). Rethinking impacts of Tourism. In Cooper, C. and Wanhill, S. (eds) Tourism
Development: environmental and Community issues. West Sussex,John Wiley and Sons.pp1-
9.

Wall G. (1997). Is Ecotourism Sustainable? Environmental Management, vol. 21, n° 4, p. 483

- 491.

Weaver D.B. (1999).Magnitude of Eco Tourism in Costa Rica and Kenya. Annals of Tourism
research 26(4) 792-816.

Journal of Tourism and Ethos