RURAL–URBAN SPATIAL INTERACTION IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH: LONG‐DISTANCE MOBILITY CHANGES,DESIRES AND RESTRICTIONS OVER TWO DECADES IN RURAL PHILIPPINES

The spatial interaction between rural and urban areas is intense in the Global South. While research into how this interaction influences livelihood opportunities is extensive, longitudinal identification and analysis of rural people's long‐distance mobility is rudimentary. This is problematic given the possible repercussions of a greater flow of people for transport system management (congestion, emissions, investments, social exclusion, etc.). Based on longitudinal survey data from 1990 to 2008/2009, this article addresses this gap by exploring how the long‐distance mobility behaviour of households and individuals has changed over a period of intensified rural–urban interaction in a rural Philippine area. The article furthermore addresses the individuals' mobility desires and restrictions related to long‐distance travel. The results indicate that both accessibility effects and effects related to information and communication technology (ICT), concentration of activities and opportunities towards major cities, age, labour market, and economic situation. Over time, particularly since improved accessibility conditions have enabled much faster travelling, more people have come to travel more frequently (although a suppressed demand is still present and inequalities are considerable) to more distant destinations, major cities in particular, for mainly social motives. A recent countertrend is evident, partly arising from mobile phones replacing physical movement. The increase in private vehicle ownership has so far been slow, so modal choice is still highly sustainable. Overall, the findings support core ideas derived from the new economic geography, but also notes, with earlier studies in transport geography, that travel time is a prime consideration.     

欧阳修论考史

欧阳修在长期从事文献史料的收集、整理和研究工作中,始终能够坚持创新与求实并重原则,在考史方面得出了一些新的观点和认识,即:考史应"不没其实",力求史实真相;"慎于传疑",不轻易下结论;"勇断不惑",敢于创发己见;"不苟立异",反对刻意标新;"切于人事",排斥天命神学,这些至今仍具有方法论的意义。     

The analysis of innovation processes

Methods are described for modelling both the speeds and the driving forces of innovation processes, namely Critical Path Schedules and Cash Flow Curves respectively. The differences between innovations in modern industrial conditions and simpler societies are discussed, and the models applied to early innovations, but the data are too fragmentary to make quantitative models, although they can be used qualitatively to show general trends. In early societies the speeds were very slow but benefit/cost ratios very high, whereas the reverse tends to be true on average for modern innovations. Long delay times are often found in early innovation processes and these are determined by a wide variety of cultural factors. Seldom has the progress of the technology itself been on the “Critical Path” of innovation processes. The “Critical Path” and “Cash Flow” methods can also be used to study other, non-innovative, complex processes.     

Critical tourism scholars: brokers of hope

Abstract

The past four decades of tourism research have demonstrated that the field would be impoverished without recognising the human aspect of scientific inquiry. The contributions made through critical approaches, Indigenous perspectives, qualitative methods and morally instilled concepts such as ‘sustainability’ or ‘community development’ have accentuated that tourism scholars are not detached and value-free producers of knowledge. Rather, our gender, ethnicity, personal and political views enter research agendas and actively shape knowledge. Alarmed by a host of social, economic, environmental, political and ethical concerns, and motivated to end injustice, inequality, oppression and discrimination, we also circumnavigate hope. However, researchers’ relationships with hope can be problematic, as evidenced by the recent tensions within critical tourism scholarship. In order to examine the extent to which hope ought to be part of tourism research, it is important to engage with the notion of hope seriously and methodically. By drawing on different varieties of hope, it is argued that these can underpin research projects to different degrees, including critical hope, hope-as-utopia, transformative hope, radical hope and pragmatic hope. It is emphasised that hope is connected to critical research in elementary ways and plays a vital role in envisioning a more just, inclusive, sustainable and equitable world. The acknowledgment of hope as part of critical research is particularly valuable amid the COVID-19 pandemic – an event with devastating consequences for communities worldwide. Through a hopeful lens, our momentary loss of tourism may bring with it a renewed appreciation and care, which has been eroded by rampant commodification and comatose consumerism. The hope driving post COVID-19 visions of tourism is argued to lie in more thoughtful and responsible engagement with tourism, and in our ability to positively transform it.     

Socialising tourism for social and ecological justice after COVID-19

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic of 2019–2020 has the potential to transform the tourism industry as well as the context in which it operates. This global crisis in which travel, tourism, hospitality and events have been shut down in many parts of the world, provides an opportunity to uncover the possibilities in this historic transformative moment. A critical tourism analysis of these events briefly uncovers the ways in which tourism has supported neoliberal injustices and exploitation. The COVID-19 pandemic crisis may offer a rare and invaluable opportunity to rethink and reset tourism toward a better pathway for the future. ‘Responsible’ approaches to tourism alone, however, will not offer sufficient capacity to enable such a reset. Instead, such a vision requires a community-centred tourism framework that redefines and reorients tourism based on the rights and interests of local communities and local peoples. Theoretically, such an approach includes a way tourism could be ‘socialised’ by being recentred on the public good. This is essential for tourism to be made accountable to social and ecological limits of the planet.