The geopolitical turn in tourism geographies
The geopolitical turn in tourism geographies
复制标题
旅游地理的地缘政治转向
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Mary Mostafanezhad
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mary Mostafanezhad
旅游业是21世纪影响最深远的地缘政治实践之一。每年有超过10亿游客跨越国界，旅游业是“主人”和“客人”之间日常地缘政治接触的重要场所。自20世纪90年代以来，除了地缘政治的重要性外，学者们还将地缘政治视为“一种描述、解释和促进观察领土权力如何形成和经历的特定方式的话语”(Kearns，2003，p.174)。在过去的十年里，专注于旅游的学者越来越多地参与地缘政治话语和实践在旅游业中的作用，带来了可以被描述为旅游地理学的地缘政治转向(Dowler，2013；Hall，2017；Hannam，2013；Hazbun，2004；Mostafanezhad，2014；Ojeda，2013；Rowen，2016)。例如，关于旅游业在证券化、属地化、移民、治国方略和国家建设中的作用的学术研究的数量正在增加，理论严谨性也在加深。在这篇评论中，我重点介绍了地缘政治思想对旅游地理学的几个当前和潜在的贡献。地缘政治中的后结构性关键转变推动了新方法的发展，以考察话语、文本和意义在地缘政治想象的形成及其物质含义中的作用(Agnew，2003；Dalby，1991,2008；Tuathail&Agnew，1992)。关键的地缘政治在一定程度上是通过承认地缘政治是发生在政策制定和学术话语之外的日常经验而发展起来的(Dittmer&Gray，2010,1667页)。最近关于“日常地缘政治”的研究考察了人们如何通过日常经历和接触来实施地缘政治(Dittmer，2010)。这一关键的地缘政治框架为旅游学者提供了新的概念工具，可以用来重新对旅游研究中反复出现的主题进行理论分析，如造地、可持续性和主宾相遇。对旅游参与者之间的中介关系层层进行审查，可以揭示机构、话语和实践(例如，摄影监视、社交媒体表现等)的组合逻辑。并有助于说明在旅游业中如何通过地点和空间制造过程来“绘制”“地理位置”。虽然地缘政治对旅游地理的贡献是广泛的，但地缘政治思想中与该领域特别相关的四个关键次主题：地缘政治生态、大众地缘政治、女权主义地缘政治和帝国地缘政治。
Tourism is one of the most far-reaching geopolitical practices of the twenty-first century. With more than one billion tourists crossing national borders annually, tourism is a critical site of everyday geopolitical encounters between ‘hosts’ and ‘guests.’ In addition to the materiality of geopolitics, since the 1990s, scholars have examined geopolitics as ‘a discourse that describes, explains and promotes particular ways of seeing how territorial powers are formed and experienced’ (Kearns, 2003, p. 174). Over the past decade, tourism-focused scholars have increasingly engaged with the role of geopolitical discourse and practice in tourism, ushering in what can be described as the geopolitical turn in tourism geographies (Dowler, 2013; Hall, 2017; Hannam, 2013; Hazbun, 2004; Mostafanezhad, 2014; Ojeda, 2013; Rowen, 2016). Scholarship on the role of tourism in securitization, territorialization, migration, statecraft and nation-building, for instance, is growing in volume and deepening in theoretical rigor. In this commentary, I highlight several of the current and potential contributions of geopolitical thought to tourism geographies. The post-structural critical turn in geopolitics has driven the development of new approaches to examining the role of discourse, texts and meaning in the formation of geopolitical imaginations and their material implications (Agnew, 2003; Dalby, 1991, 2008; Tuathail & Agnew, 1992). Critical geopolitics was developedin part, through the recognition of geopolitics as an everyday experience that occurs outside of policy-making and academic discourse (Dittmer & Gray, 2010, p. 1667). Recent work on ‘everyday geopolitics’ examines how people enact geopolitics through quotidian experiences and encounters (Dittmer, 2010). The critical geopolitics framework offers scholars of tourism new conceptual tools from which to retheorize recurrent themes in tourism studies such as placemaking, sustainability and host-guest encounters. An examination of the layers of mediated relationships crafted between tourism actors can reveal the combined logics of institutions, discourses and practices (e.g. photographic surveillance, social media representations, etc.) as well as helps to illustrate how the ‘geo’ is ‘graphed’ in tourism by placeand space-making processes. While the contribution of geopolitics to tourism geographies is wide-ranging, four key sub-themes within geopolitical thought that are particularly relevant to the field: geopolitical ecologies, popular geopolitics, feminist geopolitics and imperial geopolitics.