Tourism, Culture, and Peace Partnerships!
Anabela Monteiro1*, Sofia Lopes2, Mariem Kamoun3, Ana Ramires4 and Sara Rodrigues de Sousa5
1Faculty of Social Sciences and Technology, Universidade Europeia, Lisbon; CITUR –Leiria, Portugal
2Faculty of Social Sciences and Technology, Universidade Europeia, Lisbon, Portugal; Faculty of Economics and Business Sciences, Universidade Lusíada, Lisbon, Portugal; CETRAD-Europeia, Centre for Transdisciplinary Development Studies, University of Trás-os-Montes, Vila Real, Portugal.
3IHEC Carthage, Tunisia
4Instituto Português de Administração de Marketing - IPAM Porto; CETRAD-Europeia, Centre for Transdisciplinary Development Studies, University of Trás-os-Montes, Vila Real, Portugal.
5Faculty of Social Sciences and Technology, Universidade Europeia, Lisbon; CEComp- Centro de Estudos Comparatistas
Submission: May 15, 2024;Published: May 22, 2024
*Corresponding author: Anabela Monteiro, Faculty of Social Sciences and Technology, Universidade Europeia, Lisbon, CITUR-Leiria, Portugal
How to cite this article: Monteiro A, Lopes S, Kamoun M, Ramires A & Rodrigues de Sousa S. Tourism, Culture, and Peace Partnerships!. Open Access J Educ & Lang Stud. 2024; 2(1): 555577. DOI:10.19080/OAJELS.2024.02.555577.
Abstract
Tourism is recognized as a peace catalyst and a vital cultural exchange conduit. Despite the limited research in this area, it is crucial to investigate this connection to ascertain whether tourism can genuinely foster a symbiotic relationship with peace. This study explores the interplay between peace and tourism, shedding light on the factors influencing tourist behavior and examining perceptions of the relationship between tourism and peace. It reveals that tourism contributes to peace by encouraging travelers to seek insights into other cultures, fostering greater understanding, and promoting positive interactions with local communities.
Keywords: Tourism; Peace; Culture; Relationship
Abbreviations: UNWTO: United Nations World Tourism Organization; IIPT: International Institute for Peace through Tourism; CFA: Correspondence Factorial Analysis; WOM: Word of Mouth
Introduction
Tourism, as a driver for peace, has become an interesting issue for academics, as well as for practitioners. Its role in strengthening social and cultural links between different countries has also been highlighted as one of the main pillars of peace [1]. There has been much eloquence about tourism’s role in promoting world peace. Back in 1963, John F. Kennedy stated, "As people move the world and learn to know each other's customs and appreciate the qualities of individuals from each nation, we are building a level of international understanding which can markedly improve the atmosphere for world peace". Asongu [2] reflects on the symbiosis – tourism and peace - because peace affects tourists' decision and their attitudes and behaviors in places. Liu and Pratt (2017) stated that peace and security are an essential precondition to attract tourists to a destination.
Tourism is a key element in improving diplomatic relations between countries [3]. Furthermore, the local community also plays a crucial role in the relationship between tourism and peace. The UNWTO Conference on Tourism - A Catalyst for Development, Peace, and Reconciliation (2016), reinforced that it is necessary to involve the community in building this symbiosis, being their participation crucial for equitable growth.
Over the past four years, the topic of tourism and peace has received increasing academic attention. It has been characterized by explorations of the various paths to peace in diverse study settings, as well as understanding the relations between peace and tourism and extracting the factors that may influence tourist’s behavior which determine their decision-making [4-15].
It is crucial to rethink profoundly how peace and tourism can be a suitable tool to bring cultures closer. It is worth noting that this concept is yet to be established through empirical evidence in the tourism and hospitality industry. After acknowledging the importance of peace and tourism, it is necessary to evaluate what tourists perceive as peaceful experiences. Furthermore, welcoming all guests is the call shared by those who work in the tourism industry.
Hospitality is an essential tool in tourism, it is the pillar that promotes the image of the destination [16]. The difficulty lies in knowing how to receive due to the diversity of visitor profiles. What may be well understood by some may be seen differently by others [17]. The tourist offer is seen from different perspectives according to cultural factors, and this is where the complexity of hospitality lies. Thus, it is crucial to gain a better understanding of tourists from diverse cultural backgrounds, because it depends on various factors. Additionally, their expectations and needs depend on their nationality and gender, among other characteristics [18]. Despite the emerging literature on the subject, the question remains: Does tourism play an effective role in the strengthening of social and cultural links between different countries, becoming one of the main pillars of peace? Tourism and peace present multifaceted perspectives. They can converge to foster peace by facilitating the acquisition of cultural awareness and encouraging intercultural dialogue [8]. The interaction between visitors and hosts, characterized by positive connections, has the potential to stimulate processes of mutual understanding [19].
Terms that bring Tourism and Peace Closer Together - Terms’ Clusters of General Literature
To understand the relationship between tourism and peace a bibliometric analysis using VOS viewer software which allows for “creating maps based on network data and for visualizing and exploring these maps” [20]. The research was completed on matters available in journals/proceedings indexed in the Clarivate Analytics Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus database, on a total of 277 documents. To analyze the literature approach on these topics, a bibliometric analysis of the management WoS Core Collection publications that have topics “tourism” as well as “peace”. Using the grouping technique, it is possible to verify that there are five major groups identified by five different colors (red, green, blue, yellow, and purple) that demonstrate the approximation of words, based on frequency of usage and the number of times the word is used. The closer the two terms are, the stronger their relationship in terms of co-quote links. (Figure 1 &2)
![Click here to view Large Figure 1](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.G001.png)
Each cluster was titled, by the authors, with names characterizing its set of identifiers. Concerning the red cluster, main studies contemplate aspects related to tourists, experience, and identity [21,22], “The conscientious contemplation”. The green cluster, dubbed "The Conscientious Believer," represents interactions fostering a pathway to peace by bolstering various factors that contribute to community and global understanding [23]. In contrast, the blue cluster, "The Sustainable Conscientious," primarily addresses themes related to strategy and sustainable tourism. Loureiro's [24] study underscores the necessity of strategic planning for achieving sustainable tourism, emphasizing the multifaceted benefits it offers across economic, social, cultural, environmental, and political dimensions. The yellow cluster, termed "The Global Conscientious," explores the interplay between tourist experiences and cultural heritage. For instance, Farmaki and Antoniou's [25] research delves into how tourist experiences shape and influence narratives surrounding cultural heritage sites.
![Click here to view Large Figure 2](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.G002.png)
Lastly, the purple cluster, labelled "The Hopeful Conscientious," embodies the belief in tourism's potential to foster cooperation, initiate peace processes, and promote conscientious tourism. Pritchard et al. [26] advocate for "hopeful tourism" as a visionary perspective and a methodology aimed at facilitating transformative learning and syncretic growth.
Relationship between tourism and peace
Tourism is relevant in promoting peace [27]. Many studies and international organizations, such as the United Nations (2011), emphasized and recognized the importance of tourism as a crucial force for peace and for linking cultures. The Manila Declaration on World Tourism [28] recognizes that “world tourism can be a vital force for world peace and can provide the moral and intellectual basis for international understanding and interdependence” (p.1). Conflicts may impact tourism negatively and may engender a reduction in tourist arrivals [29]. The recent World Travel and Tourism Council (2019) report on peace and tourism underlines the World leaders’ recognition of the importance of tourism as a catalyzer for peace. As people move throughout the world and learn each other’s customs and cultures it allows the creation of a peaceful environment [10,30]. Individuals who travel to foreign destinations will have good experiences and positive interactions with their hosts, creating goodwill and building up long lasting friendships [6,31].
Tourism and peace have been studied in the hospitality and tourism industry, although there has been a debate among academics and practitioners regarding its relationship [32]. Moreover, many authors argued that tourism can be a vital force for world peace by bridging cultural and psychological gaps between groups [19]. In this sense, tourism can play an important role in reducing conflicts and tensions by challenging negative stereotypes [33]. By increasing cultural interaction and getting communities closer to each other, tourism becomes a precursor to making a positive impact on the improvement of diplomatic relations between countries [3]. According to Jalalpour and Shojaeifar [34] “the development of tourism diplomacy and its implementation can lead to the arrival of tourists, employment and economic prosperity, as a result of increased national income, and ultimately the establishment of a stable and guaranteed peace” (p. 71).
Promoting and understanding peace through tourism
One of the fundamental questions that should be considered, and which was analyzed by Litvin [14] in his article, is whether tourism can be a promoter of peace or if it is a simple beneficiary of peace. A few years earlier, D´Amore [10], the founder and president of the International Institute for Peace through Tourism (IIPT) in the Mission Statement of the organization, considered that “Every traveler is potentially an ambassador for peace”. In a study carried out by Pratt and Liu [1], where they analyzed the relationship between peace and tourism across 111 different countries, one of the conclusions was that “tourism is the beneficiary of peace rather than grounds for peace” (p. 83).
Tourism is often associated with the peace process, and there are strong indicators that tourism is the potential stabilizer and increases the chances of peace [7,35]. Although, on the one hand, there may be a conflict of cultures between the community and visitor, on the other hand, this contact has an effect of a better perception and acceptance [36]. Therefore, tourism is seen as a force for peace [27]. In other words, tourism and peace have an impact on preserving and promoting the fruitful diversity of cultures [37]. The contacts that take place between natives and visitors can allow the construction of an individual look and not a stereotypical view [38]. However, while recent studies have shown that visiting a foreign community can mitigate existing prejudice before contact, both on the visitor and host side [39,40], other perspectives highlight the fact that contact does not eliminate prejudice or empathy risks [41,42]. Thus, to understand this phenomenon, its dynamics and complexity, perhaps it is necessary to look with a broader perceptive, that is, to see the phenomenon through concepts from other research areas [8]. Tourism and peace have several points associated, such as economic development, human rights, education, sustainability, economic empowerment, a range of areas that will result in the perception that tourism and peace have in common [43,44]. Heritage is a product of the present that is based on an assumed imaginary past and justified by references to an equally assumed imaginary future. Ashworth [45] points to this same idea: "heritage is a product of the present that draws upon an assumed imaginary past and justifies by references to an equally assumed imaginary future" (p.21). Promoting and understanding peace through tourism can never be successful unless there is a neutral and open gaze at the experience of accepting the other. According to Chang and Chiang [46], there are three levels of relationships that interfere with the promotion of peace, such as: tourists and local community; tourists and industry; and between tourists. Furthermore, the multiplication of perspectives generates different perspectives and a variety of feelings and emotions such as: “strangeness, anxiety, fear and conflict, often with negative consequences" [46].
Methodology
Survey, sampling, and data collection
The primary aim of this exploratory study is to delve into the intricate relationship between peace and tourism, shedding light on the factors influencing tourists' behavior and perceptions of this relationship. To achieve a comprehensive understanding of the subject, we conducted an online survey, leveraging insights from respondents to discern how they interpret their experiences and identify the pivotal pathways to peace facilitated by tourism. Our approach encompassed the perspectives of tourists from diverse countries, adopting a multifaceted analytical lens.
This study relies on primary data collected through a questionnaire, available online in three languages, Portuguese, English and French, between January and March 2022. The questionnaire was divided into two sections. The first section included close-ended questions related to respondents’ profiles, namely, gender, age, and academic qualifications. The second section collected respondent’s opinions about the roles of tourism, through close-ended and open-ended questions, about the role of tourism as a catalyst for developing a more peaceful world (question 1) and as a vehicle for a better understanding of the different cultural identities (question 2); the visit to museums and national memorials as an inducer of reflection on the social, cultural and political context of the countries (question 3); travelling as a way of getting to know the daily lives of local communities (question 4); the effects of cultural differences between tourists and the native population on the feeling of rejection (question 5); and, peace and tourism as a consequence of each other (question 6). For each question, respondents were asked for their level of agreement (no, maybe, yes) and the corresponding justification, using an example (open-ended question). The last question requested the level of importance (using a five-point Likert scale from “very unimportant” to “very important”) of language, culture, geography, religion, and historical and political context as factors for the creation of peaceful relations between tourists and the local community.
Data analysis
A lexicometry mixed methods approach was used, combining qualitative and quantitative data analysis. Quantitative analysis was performed using Version 28.0 of IBM SPSS Statistics. Qualitative analysis was performed using the IRaMuTeQ software [47], to analyze the justifications provided by participants to the responses to each close-end question presented about tourism roles and to segment participants based on their perceptions.
IRaMuTeQ is a tool that provides the statistical analysis of texts, facilitating the organization of the collected data [48]. To identify the number of clusters in the text corpus, a multivariate analysis based on the Reinert Descending Hierarchical Classification [49] and a post-hoc correspondence factorial analysis (CFA) was performed. The DHC technique simultaneously maximizes within-cluster similarity and between-cluster difference and provides the identification of each cluster's lexical content and the representation of the post hoc CFA. The CFA procedure enables the analysis of the proximity of words and clusters extracted from the DHC. Finally, clusters of words and gender, age, level of education, concordance with the roles of tourism, and importance of language, culture, geography, religion, and historical and political context for the creation of peaceful relations between tourists and the local community, were subject to chi-square independence tests, through IRaMuTeQ, to determine the representativeness of the specific categories of the variables in the clusters.
Results
Socio-demographics. The sample consists of 296 tourists. About 68% were female and 40% aged 25 or younger. The majority had a bachelor’s degree (31%) or the secondary level of education (29%). Respondents were mainly from Portugal (65%), followed by India and Tunisia (5% each), and Brazil (4%) (Table 1).
Roles of tourism. The responses to the six close-end questions (Table 2), analyzed together, showed an average of 75% of positive answers against 12% of negative ones. Most respondents (95%) highlight the role of tourism as a vehicle for a better understanding of differences in cultural identities and as a catalyst for the development of a more peaceful world (77%).
![Click here to view Large Table 1](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.T001.png)
Source: own research
![Click here to view Large Table 2](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.T002.png)
Source: own research
Factors for the creation of peaceful relations between tourists and the local community. None of the factors listed was considered very unimportant (Table 3). Almost all participants highlighted culture as a factor of positive importance (90%). The majority consider language and historical (79% each) and political (75%) contexts as at least important. The geographical location factor is polarized in terms of importance: 51% consider it unimportant and 49% consider it at least important. Religion opposes 35% of participants, who consider it an unimportant factor in creating peaceful relations, to 65% who consider it a factor of positive importance.
Clusters of words analysis: First, the whole corpus was translated into English and the variability in word forms was reduced by merging related words into common base forms, through lemmatization. After lemmatization, the corpus presented a total of 33,579 occurrences with 2,880 distinct forms. The paragraph was the text segment criterium chosen for the analysis; 286 texts were determined (10 participants only responded to close-end questions) and the hapax number (words with frequency one) was about 3% of the occurrences.
The DHC procedure divided the corpus into two sub-corpora and identified four lexical clusters that accounted for 92% of the entire corpus. In the first sub-corpus, cluster 4, consists of 63 text segments or 24.5% of the text segments of the entire corpus, which are 257. The second sub-corpus corresponds to cluster 1, with 92 text segments (35.8% of the total corresponding to the highest percentage of retention), and to another division of this sub-corpus forming clusters 2 and 3. These two former clusters comprise 102 text segments and concentrate 14.1% and 25.7% of the text corpus, respectively. In Figure 2, the dendrogram illustrates the text classes generated. The word's order under each class is based on its strength with the class, measured by Pearson’s chi-square statistic (words with a significant chi- square value, at a 5% level of significance); the higher the order of appearance, the higher the contribution of the word to the organization of the cluster. (Figure 3)
![Click here to view Large Table 3](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.T003.png)
Source: own research
![Click here to view Large Figure 3](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.G003.png)
The CFA procedure determined three factors. Figure 3 represents the two factors with higher percentages. The first factor represents 40.9% of the text corpus distribution and opposes cluster 4 to the other clusters, therefore, it has less dependence on clusters 1, 2 and 3. The second factor represents 31.6% of the distribution and opposes cluster 3 to clusters 1 and 2. Since clusters 1 and 2 are in the same quadrant and have their mass centers near, depend highly on each other. Also, as clusters 2 and 3 are on the same column, they are dependent. In clusters 1, 3 and 4 were identified significantly differentiating characteristics related to gender, age, level of education, concordance with the roles of tourism, and importance of language, culture, geography, religion, historical and political context for the creation of peaceful relations between tourists and the local community. (Figure 4)
The cluster designation was based on the analysis of words with a frequency above the medium frequency of the entire corpus set of words (in this case 11.66) and words with significant chi-square values of association to the cluster (Pearson’s chi-square values above 3.84 in DHC analyses represent a significant separation between classes, at a 5% level of significance [48]). Typical text segments, ranked according to the chi-square sum of the active forms, allowed us to contextualize the typical vocabulary in each cluster.
![Click here to view Large Figure 4](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.G004.png)
Cluster 1 is the representation of “be conscious of”. The main terms associated with this cluster are “to promote”, “to understand”, “contact”, “to know”, “to learn”, “habit”, “to bring”, “experience”, “to accept”, and “daily”. The most typical segment, with a score of 90.37, that highlighted this focus was: “[question 1 - yes] tourism can be a catalyst for the development of a more peaceful world, as we travel and discover new cultures, we can better understand/accept”. Other answers mention tourism as [question 2 - yes] “an engine of development and greater knowledge of the human being” that helps to develop “not only us, as those around us” and associate tourism activity with [question 3 - yes] “[v]isits to museums/monuments/exhibitions”. The focus on these domains is also represented in the desire to [question 4 - yes] “learn new things and to be in contact with other people who are outside my usual environment”, as well as the awareness of the lack of mutual understanding [question 5 - yes] […] “often leads to conflicts of acceptance of difference.” A less secure position regarding the relation between both states that [question 6 - maybe] they are not a consequence of each other.” (ID 112, Female, aged under 25, secondary school, Portugal).
Cluster 1 is significantly associated with the female gender (41% of the sample, c2(1)=7.3, p<.001), age above 54 years (51%, c2(1)=4.8, p=.029), and the agreement with the role of tourism as a catalyst for the development of a more peaceful world (39%, c2(1)=4.43, p=.035) and peace and tourism as consequence of each other (40%, c2(1)=4.23, p=.040).
Clusters 1 and 2 present a high dependence.
Cluster 2: is defined by a discourse referring to “day-to-day”. The main terms (p<.001) were “war”, “to see” and “people”. The most typical segment, excerpt, with a score of 116.53, illustrates this context: "[question 1 - yes] The greater diversity and circulation between people allows creating greater bonds, better relations, and avoids many conflicts between people. Other excerpts focus on the importance of knowing other cultures as a [question 2 - yes] “(…) way to deal with adversity, beliefs, customs”, the role of museums [question 3 - yes] to learn about a country, as well as the importance of trying [question 4 - no] (…) to know the reality of local communities. Finally, there’s the recognition that [question 5 - maybe] “[…] everyone has something to gain from tourists, both natives and economies in these countries”, as well as the attractiveness of peace, in contrast to [question 6 - yes] (…) a situation of war.” (ID 160, Male, aged under 25, secondary school, Guinea-Bissau).
Clusters 2 and 3 also have dependence.
Cluster 3: represents “interplay”. In this cluster, the main terms associated are “main”, “development”, “context”, “social”, “exist”, “people”, “world”, “time”, “peaceful”, “native”, “part”, “rejection”, “tourism”, “travel”, and “visit”. The most representative statement within this cluster scored 249.10: "[question 1 - yes] Close and direct contact with other cultures can enhance their understanding through coexistence and as such break taboos and prejudices. But other statements reflect the importance assigned to [question 2 - yes] “(…) interacting with local people” as a possible way to “demystif[y] the social context and traditions inherent in each culture”, as well as to getting in contact with the possibility of finding [question 3 - maybe] “details that we would hardly have access to in a global historical context”, which reveal to be “more accurate [than] any reflection (…) made concerning that fact or culture. Other similar answers focus on the attentiveness and awareness needed to [question 4 - yes] “notice something that escapes my normal and learns other ways of living”. Complementarily, some statements alert to the dangerous impact of [question 5 - maybe] “an excessive influx of visitors”, both on the local and the visitor’s experience and others assign importance to the individual's predisposition: [question 6 - no] “There may be an influence for peace arising from tourism, through acculturation. But it also depends on the predisposition that each one must integrate in this process.” (Id 90, Female, aged from 45 to 54 years, bachelor, Portugal). Cluster 3 is associated with the age group under 25 years (38%, c2(1) =13.74, p<.001), and with the level “important” given to historical context (32%, c2(1) =7.51, p=.001) and culture (32%, c2(1) =6.05, p=.014) as factors for creation of peaceful relations between tourists and the local community.
Cluster 4 is independent of the other clusters.
Cluster 4: related to “deeper knowledge”. The main terms associated with this cluster are “to meet”, “local”, “to depend”, “museum”, “good”, and “interest”. following statement (score 279.24) is the most typical of this cluster: “[question 1 - yes] tourism serves as a product that facilitates intercultural communication, mutual interest, and economic growth, strengthens, and supports group identities and opens doors for opportunity for all and remains a constant operation. Tourism also fosters international cooperation, reducing the risks of conflict and tension. The criteria of peace among and between nations are those components.” Besides this statement, other perspectives highlight the relative local impact of tourism, considering that [question 2 - no] tourism never resulted in the genocide of aboriginal people and in local inhabitants being uprooted, as well as the shift suffered, in the last five years, by the relationship [question 3 - yes] “between three fields (cultural policies, museums and the public)”, either by the action of specific cultural policies, either by “the work of deeply dedicated employees”. Positive evaluations of this issue [question 4 - yes] relate tourism with human growth, more specifically with understanding and valuing rural residents and women, despite recognizing the historical existence of [question 5 - maybe] “tensions and dissatisfaction with residents”, such as “aboriginal cultures” or fishermen from the shore of Penang, Malaysia and Phuket, Thailand (…)”. Another example is the fact that in “Hawaii and Bali resorts traditional funeral sites were desecrated”. Finally, tourism was defined as [question 6 - yes] “a global concept that consists of many aspects with significant and spectacular consequences immediately experienced by various nations around the globe, accepting visitors and tourists all over the globe and finding acceptable ways to enhance it and encourage it. tourism is an appropriate tool for related communities and for educating societies about other communities and ecosystems.” (Id 285, Male, aged under 25, master, India).
Cluster 4 is significantly associated with the age group 25 to 34 years (49%, c2(1)=16.51, p<.001), the male gender (37%, c2(1)=10.92, p<.001), and the master degree of education (41%, c2(1)=10.61, p=.001); also, with uncertainty (maybe) related to the role of: tourism as a vehicle for understand the different cultural identities (64% of the sample, c2(1)=9.51, p=.002); tourism as catalyst for the development of a more peaceful world (37% of the sample, c2(1)=5.58, p=.018); and visits to museums and national memorials as promoters of reflection on the social, cultural, and political context of the countries. It is significantly associated with opposite levels of importance given to language – the irrelevant level (362%, c2(1) =5.31, p=.021), and to culture – the very important level (33%, c2(1) =5.99, p=.014) as factors for the creation of peaceful relations between tourists and the local community.
Discussion and Implications
Various studies highlight different research areas within the nexus of peace and tourism, each driven by distinct research objectives [50]. For instance, within the realm of economics, the focus predominantly centers on economic development, as articulated by Honey [51], who posits that "Tourism promotes peace only when it is conducted in ways that engage and benefit the destination" (p. 5). In the domain of policy, the influence of governmental decisions emerges as a crucial factor that either stabilizes or destabilizes the relationship between tourism and peace. While tourism has traditionally been viewed primarily as an economic endeavor, Webster & Ivanov [52] suggest a shifting paradigm, noting that the field increasingly recognizes its broader political and social implications: "It appears that the field is increasingly viewing it as an economic activity with political and social consequences" (p. 2).
From the perspective of environmental sustainability, the focus shifts towards tourists' behaviors at destinations. Saba [53], in an interview during the presentation of her IIPT Student Essay Peace Prize 2019, emphasized the responsibility of tourists to utilize tourism as a tool for sustainable development, fostering positive contributions to communities and the environment. Regarding tourism and peace and their link to human rights, several studies reflect on the abuse of communities in destinations, for example, according to Isaac [54], in Myanmar:
In the eyes of tourism developers in, moral issues related to injustice, human rights, and the daily lives of local people are excluded in their application context. As a result, many villages are destroyed, and human rights are violated in the name of tourism development. Developers and professionals who abstract from these situations do not consider the moral part but focus on the viability of the tourism business (p.88).
Therefore, this study sought to examine the factors identified by tourists as potential connections between tourism and peace. Rather than aiming to objectify narratives, the focus was on elucidating tourists' perspectives regarding the elements conducive to fostering "a culture of peace through tourism," which entails generating concepts for achieving dialogue for peace and advancing ideals of international citizenship [43].
Based on the cluster analysis performed, this study determined that there are characteristics that distinguish clusters from one another, and these characteristics influence aspects that define the individual's determination to travel [55]. Depending on one's personality, values, actions, and anxieties, will impact the final decision [56]. This study verified 4 different clusters that allow us to define the particularities that each one expects in the relationship between tourism and peace. (Table 4)
![Click here to view Large Table 4](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.T004.png)
Source: own research
Table 5 shows that the priorities adopt different hierarchies, since "the needs of each individual are different in the way each one demonstrates their emotional balance" [57]. In this sense, cluster 1 has the motto "Be conscious of"; cluster 2 has, in its base, the awareness of living "Day-to-day"; cluster 3 reveals the importance of interactivity between the individuals involved "Interplay"; and finally cluster 4, that has notion the relationship between tourism and peace may facilitate intercultural communication, but also leads to tensions and dissatisfaction in those involved and that a "Deeper knowledge" is needed. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that, in all of them, there is an important basis for awareness regarding the importance of knowledge of what surrounds us, as mentioned by Gursoy and McCleary [58] the more information the individual has the fewer risks there are in decision making in the choice. The information available for each destination has proven to be an important point in decision-making. As Pérez-Nebra and Torres [59] refer, at the time of choice before consumption, the first analysis is the search for information, description, narratives, and experiences of others of the place and especially WOM (word of mouth) [60]. The information about the destination, and the creation of a reliable source where the characteristics of the destination are well presented, will help the diffusion of the destination and especially the awareness of what they will find, proliferating the relationship between tourism and peace. Durko and Petrick [61] stated that “Further resources such as tourism marketing campaigns and increased positive media coverage may provide additional outlets for addressing and changing negative perceptions” (p. 1089).
![Click here to view Large Table 5](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.T005.png)
Source: own research
Conclusion
This study set out to explore tourists' perspectives on the connection between tourism and peace, as well as the factors that could either bolster or hinder this relationship. As highlighted by Mihalic [62], the relationship between tourism and peace encompasses two dimensions. On the one hand, tourism is acknowledged as a potent force for peace [28], while on the other hand, it relies on peace for its sustenance and growth. This dual nature is further reinforced by Nyaupane et al. [19], who emphasize that tourism facilitates the bridging of cultural and psychological divides among different groups [63,64].
The recognition of tourism as a catalyst for peace is underscored in the WTTC's (2019) report, affirming the industry's acknowledgement of its role in fostering peaceful relations. In our study, these insights are encapsulated in four distinct clusters (see Fig. 4), which delineate the primary characteristics that tourists associate with the relationship between tourism and peace. Analysis of the data presented in Table 4 and Figure 1 reveals recurring keywords such as tourism, culture, communities, museums, people, local, and peace. Across all responses, there is a unanimous consensus on the pivotal role of tourism in promoting mutual understanding.
Notably, many participants highlighted the significance of museums in facilitating cross-cultural understanding. Moreover, tourism was identified as a driver of international cooperation, mitigating the risk of conflicts and tensions. However, it is important to acknowledge that the relationship between tourism and peace is multifaceted and contingent upon the interactions between visitors and locals. The dynamics of these interactions can vary, ranging from harmonious acceptance to potential tensions, depending on the conduct of both parties.
In synthesis this study emphasizes the intricate relationship between tourism and peace, highlighting its dual nature as both a catalyst for and beneficiary of peace. The research explores tourists' perspectives on this connection, revealing a consensus on the pivotal role of tourism in promoting mutual understanding. The study identifies key factors, such as cultural exchange facilitated by tourism and the significance of museums in fostering cross-cultural understanding.
Moreover, the research underscores tourism's potential to drive international cooperation and mitigate conflicts. However, it also acknowledges the complexity of this relationship, contingent upon the interactions between visitors and locals. While tourism can foster harmony and cooperation, tensions may arise depending on the behavior of both parties involved.
Overall, the study suggests that tourism can contribute positively to peace-building efforts, but its impact is nuanced and context-dependent. Recognizing and understanding these dynamics is crucial for harnessing the potential of tourism as a force for promoting peace and mutual understanding. (Figure 5)
![Click here to view Large Figure 5](images/OAJELS.MS.ID.555577.G005.png)
Limitations and Future Research
This study faces certain limitations, notably the insufficient information to fully analyze the discrepancies emerging in the interpretation of the results. A more comprehensive dataset would enable a deeper understanding of the origins of the characteristics identified by the respondents.
The contextual description of the study setting offers valuable insights into the applicability of the research objectives and the available research framework. These considerations can vary significantly from one country to another, influenced by factors such as cultural proximity.
For future investigations, it is imperative to employ diverse analytical instruments that delve into the same constructs with greater depth. Additionally, there is a need to define and validate additional values and characteristics of individuals' cultures, including gender, beliefs, and origin, among others. This broader approach will enrich our understanding of the complex interplay between tourism, peace, and cultural dynamics.
References
- Pratt S, Liu A (2016) Does tourism really lead to peace? A global view. International Journal of Tourism Research 18(1): 82-90.
- Asongu SA, Nwachukwu JC (2017) The impact of terrorism on governance in African countries. World Development 99: 253-270.
- Baranowski S, Covert LP, Gordon BM, Jobs RI, Noack C, Rosenbaum A, et al. (2019) Discussion: tourism and diplomacy. Journal of Tourism History 11(1): 63-90.
- Anson C (1999) Planning for peace: The role of tourism in the aftermath of violence. Journal of Travel Research 38(1): 57-61.
- Ap J, Var T (1990) Does tourism promote world peace? Tourism Management 11(3): 267-273.
- Arndt RT (2007) The First Resort of Kings: American Cultural Diplomacy in the Twentieth Century. Washington DC. Askjellerud, S. (2003). The tourist: A messenger of peace? Annals of Tourism Research 30(3): 741-744.
- Becken S, Carmignani F (2016) Does tourism lead to peace? Annals of Tourism Research 61: 63-79.
- Carbone F (2022) “Don’t look back in anger”. War museums’ role in the post conflict tourism-peace nexus. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 30(2-3): 565-583.
- Cho M (2007) A re-examination of tourism and peace: The case of the Mt. Gumgang tourism development on the Korean Peninsula. Tourism Management 28(2): 556-569.
- D'Amore L (1988) Tourism - The world's peace industry. Journal of Travel Research 27(1): 35-40.
- Farmaki A (2017) The tourism and peace nexus. Tourism Management 59: 528-540.
- Jafari J (1989) Tourism and peace. Annals of Tourism Research 16(3): 439-443.
- Leslie D (1996) Northern Ireland, tourism, and peace. Tourism Management 17(1): 51-55.
- Litvin SW (2020) Review and commentary tourism and peace: a review and commentary. Tourism Review International 23(3-4): 173-181.
- Shepherd J, Laven D (2022) The impact of tourism on peace. In Handbook of Tourism Impacts. Edward Elgar Publishing Pp:166-182.
- Alves AR, Czajkowski A (2023) A prática da hospitalidade urbana e a perspectiva das Cidades Educadoras. Peer Review 5(5): 300-314.
- Torres E, Kline S (2013) From customer satisfaction to customer delight: Creating a new standard of service for the hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 25(5): 642-659.
- Sæþórsdóttir AD, Hall CM (2020) Visitor satisfaction in wilderness in times of overtourism: A longitudinal study. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 29(1): 123-141.
- Nyaupane GP, Teye V, Paris C (2008) Innocents abroad: Attitude change toward hosts. Annals of tourism Research 35(3): 650-667.
- van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2019) Accuracy of citation data in Web of Science and Scopus. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07011.
- Fukuma Y (2019) The Construction of Tokkō Memorial Sites in Chiran and the Politics of “Risk-Free” Memories. Japan Review 33: 247-270.
- Strömbom L (2019) Exploring prospects for agonistic encounters in conflict zones: Investigating dual narrative tourism in Israel/Palestine. Alternatives 44(2-4): 75-93.
- Kim K, Uysal M, Sirgy MJ (2013) How does tourism in a community impact the quality of life of community residents? Tourism Management 36: 527-540.
- Loureiro A (2019) Innovation and technology–the only answer for sustainable tourism growth. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 11(6): 743-747.
- Farmaki A, Antoniou K (2017) Politicising dark tourism sites: Evidence from Cyprus. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 9(2): 175-186.
- Pritchard A, Morgan N, Ateljevic I (2011) Hopeful tourism: A new transformative perspective. Annals of Tourism Research 38(3): 941-963.
- Pedersen SB (2020) A passport to peace? Modern tourism and international idealism. European Review 28(3): 389-402.
- World Tourism Organization (1980). Manila Declaration on World Tourism.
- Lepp A, Gibson H, Lane C (2011) Image and perceived risk: A study of Uganda and its official tourism website. Tourism Management 32(3): 675–684.
- Carbone F (2017) International tourism and cultural diplomacy: A new conceptual approach towards global mutual understanding and peace through tourism. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal 65(1): 61-74.
- Carbone F, Oosterbeek L, Costa C, Ferreira AM (2020) Extending and adapting the concept of quality management for museums and cultural heritage attractions: A comparative study of southern European cultural heritage managers' perceptions. Tourism Management Perspectives 35: 100698.
- Moufakkir O, Kelly I (2010) Tourism, progress, and peace. Cabi.
- Tomljenovic R (2010) Tourism and intercultural understanding or contact hypothesis revisited. Tourism, Progress and Peace, Wallingford, UK and Boston, MA: CABI 17-34.
- Jalalpour S, Shojaeifar J (2014) The tourism industry and international relations. World Journal of Environmental Biosciences, 6: 68-72.
- Tomczewska-Popowycz N, Quirini-Popławski Ł (2021) Political instability equals the collapse of tourism in Ukraine? Sustainability 13(8): 4126.
- Sharma P, Charak NS, Kumar R (2018) Sustainable tourism development and peace: a local community approach. JOHAR 13(1): 36.
- Almuhrzi HM, Al-Azri HI (2018) Conference report: second UNWTO/UNESCO world conference on tourism and culture: fostering sustainable development. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 13(1): 144-150.
- Suvantola J (2018) Tourist's Experience of a Place. Routledge.
- Çelik S (2019) Does Tourism Change Tourist Attitudes (Prejudice and Stereotype) towards Local People? Journal of Tourism and Services 10(18): 35-46.
- Monterrubio C (2016) The impact of spring break behaviour: An integrated threat theory analysis of residents' prejudice. Tourism Management 54: 418-427.
- Manola M, Papagrigoriou A (2019) Empathy in Tourism Industry: A Humancentered Approach of Hospitality in Business World. tourismos 14(2): 119-133.
- Tucker H (2016) Empathy and tourism: Limits and possibilities. Annals of tourism research 57: 31-43.
- Blanchard LA, Higgins-Desbiolles F (2013) Peace through tourism. Routledge.
- Seyfi S, Hall CM, Vo-Thanh T (2022) Tourism, peace, and sustainability in sanctions-ridden destinations. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 30(2-3): 372-391.
- Ashworth GJ (2020) Heritage in ritual and identity. In Ritual, heritage, and identity. Routledge India. Pp. 19-38.
- Chang HH, Chiang CC (2019) Encounter experiences among tourists at attraction sites-an application of social contact theory. Asian Journal of Business Research 9(3): 24-50.
- Ratinaud P (2009) IRAMUTEQ: Interface de R pour les Analyses Multidimensionnelles de Textes et de Questionnaires [Computer software].
- Camargo BV, Justo AM (2013) IRAMUTEQ: um software gratuito para análise de dados textuais. Temas em psicologia 21(2): 513-518.
- Reinert Max (1993) “Quelques problèmes méthodologiques posés par l’analyse de tableaux ‘Énonces x Vocabulaire’.” Paper presented at Journées internationales d’analyse statistique des données textuelles, Montpellier, France
- Silva S, Araújo E (2014) Medir o impacto nas ciências sociais. Pontos de referência teóricos. Holos 4: 334-343.
- Honey M (2008) Tourism: preventing conflict, promoting peace. Paper commissioned for USIP 2: 1-6.
- Webster C, Ivanov SH (2013) Tourism as a force for political stability. The International Handbook on “Tourism and Peace” (Forthcoming).
- Saba C (2019) To what extent do tourists have a responsibility to build a sustainable and peaceful world through tourism? The International Institute for Peace through Tourism (IIPT).
- Isaac RAMI (2014) Responsible Tourism and Development in the Context of Peacebuilding. International Handbook on Tourism and Peace. Klagenfurt: Drava 87-100.
- Swarbrooke J, Horner S (2002) O comportamento do consumidor no turismo. Aleph.
- Takano LMCF, Kaetsu ST (2018) Fatores que influenciam a compra de viagens para-Disney. Revista da Faculdade de Administração e Economia 9(1): 235-256.
- Refatti S, Santos JAP (2013) A evolução do capital humano nas organizações. FACIDER-Revista Científica 3(3): 1-15.
- Gursoy D, McCleary KW (2004) An Integrative Model of Tourists’information Search Behavior. Annals of tourism research 31(2): 353-373.
- Pérez-Nebra AR, Torres CV (2010) Measuring the tourism destination image: a survey based on the Item response theory. Revista de Administração Contemporânea 14: 80-99.
- Jalilvand MR, Samiei N (2012) The impact of electronic word of mouth on a tourism destination choice: Testing the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Internet research 22(5): 591-612.
- Durko A, Petrick J (2016) The Nutella project: an education initiative to suggest tourism to peace between the United States and Afghanistan. Journal of Travel Research 55(8): 1081-1093.
- Mihalic T (1996) Tourism and warfare: The case of Slovenia. Tourism, crime and international security issues 233.
- Malik Y (2022) Tourism and Peace: Relationship between Tourism, Peace & Violence and Conflict. Peace & Violence and Conflict.
- BROOME ME (2006) Integrative literature reviews for the development of concepts. In: RODGERS BL, CASTRO A Revisão sistemática e meta-aná