ANT: A decade of interfering with tourism
Introduction
Ten years ago, in September 2007, this journal published an article in which actor-network theory (ANT) was introduced as an alternative way of looking at and researching tourism. In this article, Van der Duim (2007) proposed that tourism should be seen in terms of tourismscapes, contingently assembled and interdependent socio-material configurations consisting of people, organizations, objects, technologies, and spaces. These tourismscapes are economic, physical, technological, political, spatial and social at the same time and “should not be reduced to any of these individual ‘factors’” (see Urry, 2016: 62–63). Before this entry, a small number of forays had already been made where ANT was translated into the realm of tourism studies (Cloke and Perkins, 2005, Franklin, 2004, Jóhannesson, 2005, O'Neill and Whatmore, 2000). Soon, they were succeeded by others, notably (Ren, 2010, Ren et al., 2010). Although differing in their use of ANT, these early accounts provided alternative descriptions of tourism development and its implications for and relationship with society and space. They did so by taking the role of materialities and non-humans into account and hence brought forth diverse relational orderings of tourism. Over a decade and through such studies, ANT has managed to interfere with tourism research, tourism realities and tourism futures as ANT has gradually—and in the last few years increasingly—been translated and performed in the field of tourism studies where it has raised interest as well as controversies.
The latter is illustrated by one of the reviewers of the aforementioned 2007 article, arguing that:
as a celebratory display of the impenetrability of advanced postmodern vocabularies, this manuscript is a virtuoso performance. As a meaningful contribution to human understanding, to actual communication of scholarship, this manuscript is a dismal failure. Thus, the real question is not the nature of the ultimate recommendation requested of reviewers but rather a question for the editor: what does Annals want to be? Is it to be the outlet where members of a select guild display their skills at parlor games designed solely for the amusement of fellow guild members, or, is it to be an outlet for meaningful communication of scholarship? (Anonymous reviewer of the 2007 article Tourismscapes, 2006).
This reviewer pointed especially to the ‘language’ of ANT studies, which sometimes comes across as impenetrable. We will come back to some of the reasons for this below, but at the moment we argue that a specific ANT-jargon is not necessary to make use of the toolbox it offers. What is essential is an interest in exploring tourism relations.
Eventually the article on tourismscapes was published as the other three reviewers were far more positive; acknowledging the potential contribution the article could make to rethink tourism and tourism research. This also reflected an earlier decision taken by the editorial board of this journal to dedicate the journal to developing theoretical constructs, reflecting a broader ‘conceptual turn’ in tourism studies (see also Cohen & Cohen, 2012).
The debate continues as ANT still interrupts common understanding of the role and value of social science research. As Michael (2017: 1) recently summarizes: “whether as a positive resource or source of irritation, ANT has become a conceptual framework (or latterly, an analytic and methodological sensibility) that many writers feel obliged to reference.” Tourism studies are no exception. For instance, in a 2015 discussion of ANT on the online forum of TriNet, Juergen Gnoth questioned the relevance of ANT for tourism research by asserting that “it does not really bring anything new to the table as far as I can see, other than a renewed consciousness for positivists”. This statement echoes much previous critique against ANT and expresses some of the controversy surrounding the approach.
The aim of this article is to review ANT’s entanglements with and effects on tourism studies as well as point towards potential future trajectories of ANT and tourism research. The question ‘what ANT brings new to the table’ serves as a unifying thread of our discussion. We will not explicate what ANT definitely ‘is’, but describe ANT as a multiple, complex and often disparate resource “that opens up a space for asking certain sorts of methodological, empirical, analytic and political questions about the processes of the (more-than) social world” (Michael, 2017: 3). Using ANT as a tool, or a travelling device, to move along the actor-network of ‘ANT and tourism studies’, we will analyse the effects of the encounters between ANT and tourism studies; effects which result from the (net)working of researchers and authors, a series of overlapping networks (of scholars, schools of thought) and non-human things (like books and articles) that are in constant flux—appearing and disappearing, joining and parting (see for a similar approach Ren et al., 2010, Tribe, 2010).
On our journey, we start by discussing some of the basic premises of ANT, revisiting some of the principle characteristics of ANT inspired studies. Those are the grounds that have both attracted interest and sparked controversy in different corners of the social sciences. We will attend to some of the main points of critique as a way to further open up and discuss the potentials of ANT. We will then turn to tourism studies to illustrate and discuss the relevance of ANT for tourism studies. Third and final, we will explore and discuss the workings of ANT in practice. We conclude by summarizing ten years of ANT and tourism studies and sketch out potential trajectories of ANT in tourism research.
Section snippets
Following ANT
As has been pointed out, to describe ANT as a whole or a unified approach is somewhat a betrayal (Baiocchi et al., 2013, Law, 2007, Law and Singleton, 2013, Michael, 2017). In Law’s (2007: 2) words: “there is no ‘it’. Rather it is a diaspora that overlaps with other intellectual traditions“ making it difficult (and undesirable) to situate ANT once and for all or describe its development in a linear way. Below, we touch on three issues that illustrate the conceptual controversies of ANT related
ANT and tourism studies
As already illustrated in the above, in the last ten years ANT has stirred new outlooks on tourism and tourism research. The network of ANT inspired scholars has gradually grown, just as the number of publications (see references) and citations. With around 200 citations in Google Scholar, the tourismscapes article now belongs to the top 10% most cited publications in the research field of social sciences. In the 2007 article two main concepts were introduced: tourismscapes and ‘modes of
Future trajectories
In this article we have summarized what happened with ANT and tourism studies since the publication in this journal of the article Tourismscapes in 2007. We have traced some of the routes and pathways of ANT, revisiting particular sites of controversy and trailed some of the avenues along which ANT has successfully interfered with the knowledge system of tourism research (Ren et al., 2010, Tribe and Liburd, 2016). We have argued that the strengths of ANT lies in empirical studies where tending
References (118)
- et al.
Actor-network theory and stakeholder collaboration: The case of Cultural Districts
Tourism Management
(2011) - et al.
Mess and method: Using ANT in tourism research
Annals of Tourism Research
(2016) - et al.
Current sociological theories and issues in tourism
Annals of Tourism Research
(2012) - et al.
SNV's modes of ordering: Organizing tourism as development practice
Tourism Management
(2016) - et al.
Aurora borealis: Choreographies of darkness and light
Annals of Tourism Research
(2017) - et al.
Practising tourism; the relevance of practice theory for tourism research
Annals of Tourism Research.
(2017) Socio-technological authentication
Annals of Tourism Research
(2016)- et al.
The business of place: Networks of property, partnership and produce
Geoforum
(2000) - et al.
A tourism innovation case: An actor-network approach
Annals of Tourism Research
(2010) - et al.
Seaside resort-hinterland nexus: Palanga, Lithuania
Annals of Tourism Research
(2011)
Non-human agency, radical ontology and tourism realities
Annals of Tourism Research
Constructing tourism research: A critical inquiry
Annals of Tourism Research
Wildlife tourism, science and actor network theory
Annals of Tourism Research
Enacting destinations: The politics of absence and presence
Actor-Network Theory and the ethnographic imagination: An exercise in translation
Qualitative Sociology
Interpreting tourism at olympic sites: a cross-cultural analysis of the beijing olympic green
International Journal of Tourism Research
Unscrewing the big Leviathan: How actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so
Some elements in a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay
Turning in the graveyard: Trees and the hybrid geographies of dwelling, monitoring and resistance in a Bristol cemetery
Cultural Geography
Cetacean performance and tourism in Kaikoura, New Zealand
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
Actor-network theory and stakeholder collaboration: The case of Slovenia
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences
Shadowing: and other techniques for doing fieldwork in modern societies
The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology
Social Studies of Science
Searching for realism, structure and agency in Actor Network Theory
The British Journal of Sociology
‘Scape’-based forms: A preliminary review of their use in the study of tourism-related activities
Tourism Recreation Research
Urban assemblages. How actor-network theory changes urban studies
Destinations as virtual objects of tourist communication
Actor-network theory in education
From actor-network theory to political economy
Capitalism, Nature, Socialism
Entrepreneurship and controversies of tourism development
Tourism as an ordering: Towards a new ontology of tourism
Tourist Studies
On why we dig the beach: Tracing the subjects and objects of the bucket and spade for a relational materialist theory of the beach
Tourist Studies
The choreography of a mobile world: Tourism orderings
On the consequences of post-ANT
Science, Technology & Human Values
Following scientists through society? Yes, but at arm's length
Tourism and the anthropocene
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Material cultures of tourism
Leisure Studies
Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan©_Meets_OncoMouse™. Feminism and Technoscience
Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene
Enacting risk at Besseggen
Social order and the blank figure
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
What is a good tomato?
Valuation Studies
Tourism, ANT and the Earth
Being alive: Essays on movement, knowledge and description
When ANT meets SPIDER: Social theory for arthropods
The territoriality paradigm in cultural tourism
Tourism
Transformation from historic cityscapes to urban tourismscapes – A discussion note
Rivista di Scienze del Turismo
Latour and pickering: Post-human perspectives on science, becoming, and normativity
Chasing Technoscience: Matrix for Materiality
Cited by (50)
Reassembling more-than-human sustainability: Relations with snow
2023, Annals of Tourism ResearchExploring Chinese students’ issues and concerns of studying abroad amid COVID-19 pandemic: an actor-network perspective
2022, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism EducationSustainability manifesting as a multi-material and -sited network effect: How boat-sourced sewage management facilities serve as governance artefacts advancing sustainability in nautical tourism
2021, Marine Pollution BulletinCitation Excerpt :Examples of similarly very practical ANT approaches to varying tourism contexts are Paget et al. (2010), Valkonen (2010), Ren (2011), and Jóhannesson and Lund (2017). To date, ANT has been inspiring tourism scholars for nearly two decades and applications in the field have demonstrated that tourism cannot be understood without taking into account the role of non-human entities in achieving functional tourism workings (see van der Duim et al., 2017). However, so far, only few studies have made use of ANT to study sustainable tourism development in particular (see van der Duim et al., 2005; van der Duim and van Marwijk, 2006; van der Duim and Caalders, 2008; Hummel and van der Duim, 2012; Buijtendijk et al., 2018).
Mobile video ethnography for evoking animals in tourism
2021, Annals of Tourism ResearchAn exploration of actor-network theory and social affordance for the development of a tourist attraction: A case study of a Jimmy-related theme park, Taiwan
2021, Tourism ManagementCitation Excerpt :The connecting relationship between nostalgia and the square/park comes from the essence of Jimmy picture books (full of fairytale-like, dreamworld-like, fictional, or child-at-heart scenes for readers to imagine, fantasize, and even daydream about) and the materialized technology of installation arts that have incarnated imaginary figures/characters from the Jimmy picture books into realistic and touchable objects. Furthermore, the theme park is a mode of tourismscapes because it consists of the complex relational network among people, organizations, objects, technologies, and spaces (van der Duim, 2007; van der Duim et al., 2017). According to his study of Norway's North Cape as an iconophilic attraction, Jacobsen (1997) states that when a tourist attraction with high imageability evokes strong images or impressions within the mental mechanisms of observers, it can take precedence in the tourists' selection of desirable attractions.
The co-evolution of therapeutic landscape and health tourism in bama longevity villages, China: An actor-network perspective
2020, Health and PlaceCitation Excerpt :As such, ANT is not a theory in the traditional sense, but rather an approach to guide the investigation of the dynamics of social order (Law, 1992; Latour, 1996). As a relational and process-oriented approach, ANT has had a profound influence on a wide range of research fields in recent decades, including health (Garrety, 1997; Bilodeau and Potvin, 2018), landscape (Murdoch, 1998; Allen, 2011) and tourism (O'Neill and Whatmore, 2000; Van der Duim et al., 2017), and has also stimulated the “relational turn” in human geography (Jones, 2009). Below we review the application of ANT in a therapeutic landscape and tourism context to explore how ANT can be employed in an examination of the coevolution of the therapeutic landscape and health tourism.