CONSERVATION ETHIC
2.4 Part III – Conceptual Framing
The final part of this chapter presents the conceptual framing for this thesis. The conceptual framework offers a visual illustration of the ways in which the theoretical constructs of this thesis map on to, or are viewed as embedded within, specific features pertinent to the responsible tourism experience (2.4.1). The section culminates with the thesis’ research questions (2.4.2).
62 2.4.1 Conceptual Framework
Figure 2.2 Conceptual framework
At the centre of the framework lies the subject’s responsible tourism experience;
the high-involvement nature of which is portrayed through a recognition of the layers of ‘principal’ and ‘ancillary’ services that tourists encounter (McCabe, 2009) (see 2.3.3). Stemming from the responsible tourism product are the three Foucauldian theoretical concepts, denoting how the subject’s engagement in the ethical holiday may result in ‘power struggles’ (1982), ‘problematisations’
(1984a) and ‘self-care practices’ (1984c). As evident from Figure 2.2, it is noted that the three theoretical concepts are viewed as conceptually distinct but interrelated phenomena, as portrayed by the (connected) dotted lines. This
63 framing serves to account for instances where problematisations may transpire in response to power struggles between themselves and (non)market actors (for example), necessitating that tourists engage in practices of self-care (see 2.2.3).
The conceptual framework is also attuned to how power struggles, problematisations and self-care practices may emerge in light of a range of personal (micro), product (meso) and destination level (macro) considerations that tourists encounter or have to balance alongside their (un)ethical practices and subjectivities (see 2.2.2.3). At the consumer level, the framework is attuned to how responsibility may be influenced by the subject’s broader ‘life politics’
(Giddens, 1991) – such as financial and familial considerations (e.g. Szmigin et al, 2009; Ritch & Schroder, 2012) – and other motivations for travel (e.g.
Gilbert, 1992, as in Cooper et al, 2008). At the market level, the framework is attuned to the influence of product-type, policies and promotional literature, and at the destination level it considers how consumer responsibility may be impacted by novel or (un)familiar socio-cultures (e.g. Jamal, 2004), language or infrastructural availability.
Providing several illustrative examples, it is possible that consumers may face
‘power struggles’ regarding certain ethical practices promoted in guidebooks – e.g. such as using public transport – when, as a parent, familial circumstances make travelling by car more convenient and flexible with young children.
Equally, it might be that infrastructural considerations at the destination level – such as lack of recycling facilities – stimulate consumers to protect their responsible identity by attributing their inability to recycle to differences in
‘home’ and ‘away’ ethics rather than personal ethical transgression. In this vein,
64 it is evident that the framework effectively captures factors which may influence a consumer’s agency to engage in certain (un)ethical actions and behaviours in light of the context in which they are situated.
Finally, the conceptual framework captures the (angles) from which the holiday can be examined (and triangulated) (see 2.3.5); namely before (Prospective Phase (P)), during (Active Phase (A)) and after (Reflective Phase (R)). More detail on the three phases of the tourism experience is provided in Chapter 3, specifically sections 3.4.2 and 3.4.3.
2.4.2 Research Questions
The thesis will seek to answer the following research questions. The three research questions map onto the Prospective (pre-holiday), Active (on holiday) and Reflective (post-holiday) phases of the tourism experience respectively (see sections 3.4.2 and 3.4.3):
RQ1) How do tourists envisage the responsible tourism product prior to travel?
i) What types of ethical actions, behaviours and choices do consumers project to undertake?
ii) What types of (non)market discourses do consumers draw on to shape their projections?
RQ2) How do tourists experience responsibility whilst on holiday?
i) How do tourists frame, rationalise and resolve their (un)ethical actions, behaviours and choices (and why)?
ii) What types of ethical dilemmas do consumers encounter (and why)?
65 iii) How are ethical actions, behaviours and choices – alongside any tensions, contradictions and compromises – influenced by the tourists’ broader context at the individual (micro), market-consumer (meso) and destination (macro) levels?
RQ3) How do tourists reflect on their responsible tourism experience as being shaped (or not) by market influences?
i) How do tourists reflect on the tourism industry’s products and communications?
ii) How do tourists maintain, protect or devolve a sense of freedom over their practices and subjectivities?
iii) How do tourists recount, rationalise and resolve any struggles between promulgated and personal constructions of responsible practice?
2.5 Conclusion of Chapter
After demarcating the consumer responsibility literature in accordance with three disciplinary perspectives, Part I argued that the sociological discipline is the best-suited perspective for examining the complexities of the market-consumer interface in a way which induces new insights into market-consumers’ ethical agency. Here, it was argued that the adoption of the (late) Foucauldian concepts of ‘power struggles’, ‘problematisations’ and ‘self-care practices’ enables an examination of how consumers conform to, critique or resist market-promulgated ways of being a ‘responsible tourist’, as well as how they (re)negotiate alternative meanings of how to be ethical and act ethically.
Part II contended that responsible tourism presents a highly performative and (often) unfamiliar experiential context, two factors which may have novel implications for the strength and scope of the market-consumer interface. It
66 further suggested that these empirical conditions may render the tourist susceptible to a different set of ethical tensions and compromises to those previously considered, potentially providing new insights into the reasons behind, and rationalisations for, the attitude-behaviour gap. Finally, Part II demonstrated that there is space for this thesis to examine issues relating to consumers’ ethical agency across the total tourism experience, examining how consumers’ practices and subjectivities are (in)consistent within and across the three phases of the holiday.
Overall, it has been argued that by sharpening the theoretical conditions through which consumer responsibility is viewed, this thesis engenders alternative thinking on the market-consumer interface while considering the associated implications for consumer agency and ethics. The next chapter outlines and justifies the participative methodology and methods adopted to answer the research questions.
67