Tourism and community resilience in the Anthropocene: accentuating temporal overtourism
Joseph M. Cheer
1
*
Claudio Milano
2
Marina Novelli
3
1
Centre for Tourism Research (CTR), Wakayama University, Wakayama, Japan
2
Ostelea School of Hospitality & Tourism, University of Lleida, Barcelona, Spain;
3
School of Sport and Service Management, University of Brighton, Brighton, UK
*CONTACT Joseph M. Cheer josephmcheer@gmail.com Centre for Tourism Research (CTR), Wakayama
University, Sakaedani 930, Wakayama 640-8510, Japan
ABSTRACT
Global tourism growth is unprecedented. Consequently, this has elevated the sector as a key plank for
economic development, and its utility is deeply embedded in political, economic and social-ecological
discourse. Where the expansion of the sector leverages natural and cultural landscapes, this applies
pressure to social and ecological underpinnings that if not reconciled, can become problematic. The way
this plays out in Australia’s Shipwreck Coast and the wider Great Ocean Road region, especially the
implications for community resilience, is the focus. Emphasis is placed on the vulnerability of peripheral
coastal areas to development that withdraws from destination endowments, yet fails to provide
commensurate economic yield as a suitable trade-off. This is obvious where tourism intensification has
led to concerns about the breach of normative carrying capacities. Temporal overtourism driven by
seasonal overcrowding is countenanced as emblematic of tourism in the Anthropocene where focus tends
to be largely growth-oriented, with much less attention given to bolstering social-ecological resilience,
especially community resilience. At stake is the resilience of regional areas and their communities, who in
the absence of garnering commensurate economic returns from tourism expansion find themselves in
social and ecological deficit.
KEYWORDS Community resilience; overtourism; temporal overtourism; seasonality; social-ecological
resilience
Introduction
The essence of the Anthropocene is captured by Walker and Salt’s declaration that “humanity has
been spectacularly successful in modifying the planet to meet the demands of a rapidly growing
population” (20, p. xi). With that in mind, that the Anthropocene has become embedded in the contemporary
and critical tourism discourse is unsurprising; after all, the human-in-nature dimension central to the
unfolding of the epoch is very much exemplified in global systems (Crutzen & Stoermer, 2000; Zalasiewicz
& Waters, 2016), especially concerns that it represents a “threshold marking a sharp change in the
relationship of humans to the natural world” (Hamilton, Gemenne & Bonneuil, 2015, p. 3). Unprecedented
expansion underlines the global tourism status quo and coincides with a long period of unparalleled
economic growth and affluence. The implications of this is greater global mobility (Brown & Wittbold,
2018) and the opening of new destinations, as well as improved access to more established ones.
With consideration to the scaffolding of this paper from a theoretical standpoint, “The Anthropocene has
become a differential lens through which disciplines across the academy are reviewing, debating and
reinventing their conceptions of humanity and nature” (Bauer & Ellis, 2018, p. 209). Tourism and the
Anthropocene is framed by Gren and
Huijbens (2014, p. 7) as “a geophysical force that is part of the relationship between humanity and the Earth”.
Apropos to that, the upshot of travel as a marker of the experience economy in the Anthropocene is manifold
and includes implications for destination development, triple-bottom line impacts, policy and planning and
natural resource management (Gren & Huijbens, 2016). The Anthropocene is accentuated by concerns
regarding climate change, resource depletion, increased securitization and momentum shifts to the digital
environment (Steffen, Crutzen & McNeill, 2007). This leads to questions around how practicable the pursuit
of sustainable tourism in the Anthropocene might be and the extent to which it undermines the resilience of
tourism dependent communities (Bec, McLennan & Moyle, 2016; Calgaro & Lloyd, 2008; Cheer & Lew,
2017; Lew, 2014; Lew & Wu, 2017).
Antarctica and the Arctic, once out of reach, are more accessible today and doubtless driven by so-
called last chance tourism (Lemelin, Dawson, Stewart, Maher, & Lueck 1020). This is a clarion call
to reinforce that more than ever, tourism must align more closely with sustainability concerns (Bramwell,
2006; Saarinen, 2013). Moreover, this dovetails neatly into the Anthropocene that speaks of humans making
hitherto unprecedented change to earth systems (Hamilton, Gemenne & Bonneuil, 2015), and as Gren and
Huijbens implore, “For the first time in history, humanity is confronted with the task of having to carry the
Earth on its shoulders” (2014, p. 15). Growth in tourism, as personified in visitation to Antarctica, is at the
vanguard of the emergent contemporary mobility that emphasises the dilemma of the Anthropocene (Schillat,
Jensen, Vereda, Sánchez, & Roura, 2016).
This prompts the question: what are the limits to tourism growth (O'Reilly, 1986)? Fundamentally, the
link between tourism and the Anthropocene concerns the extent to which global travel undermines earth
systems and raises the question: under what circumstances can this development be better positioned for
more sustainable and resilient outcomes (Lew & Cheer, 2017; Hall, Prayag, & Amore, 2018)? Ushered in
are broad considerations regarding how tourism growth elevates concerns about the provisioning of social
and ecological systems for tourism (Mosedale, 2015; Mostafanezhad, Norum, Shelton, & Thompson-Carr,
2016; Nepal & Saarinen, 2016; O'Reilly, 1986).
Accordingly, of particular focus here is community resilience to tourism-induced transformations at the
coastal periphery (we link community resilience with social resilience and assume the two to align). While
we engage with the Anthropocene, reconceptualising the epoch and arguing its finer theoretical and
ontological threads is beyond the scope of this undertaking. Instead, we make fundamental and precise
connections between tourism and the emergent concept, overtourism and examine how this impacts the
resilience of peripheral coastal communities. Stonich’s (1998) stridence that “unbridled tourism
development” represents a real risk for communities is acknowledged. The risk alluded to here is what Hall
et al. (2018) refer to as change and disturbance in the tourism system. The principal question we pose asks:
to what extent are tourism impact concerns shaped by community resilience as exemplified by tourism in
peripheral coastal contexts in the Anthropocene?
In the main, we zero in on community resilience and leverage qualitative data that is community
stakeholder focused and extracted via a longitudinal study between 2015 and 2017 in the Shipwreck Coast
region of southern Australia. Fittingly, we employ social-ecological systems (SES) resilience as a broad
theoretical framework from which we examine community resilience and argue that it is central to the
Anthropocene and enmeshed in political, economic, social and ecological dimensions, which, in turn,
impinge on and help shape nascent institutional structures (Gren & Huijbens, 2014; Hall et al., 2018).
Importantly, we overlay this discussion with the master planning process, specifically the Shipwreck Coast
Master Plan (Parks Victoria, 2015).
Overtourism is now part of the popular and scholarly lexicon; emblematic of tourism in the Anthropocene
where the capacity of destinations to cope has reached tipping points (Milano, 2017; Sheivachman, 2017).
In particular, we hone in on temporal overtourism which occurs in response to concentrated, occasional (e.g.
special events), daily or seasonal visitation spikes (Gössling, Ring, Dwyer, Andersson, & Hall, 2016). Such
situations are ubiquitous when management regimes fail (McKinsey & Company, 2017), and overtourism
occurs when destinations breach tolerable thresholds that communities can absorb (Milano, 2018; Milano,
Cheer, & Novelli, 2018). Also, overtourism raises objections against tourism that has outgrown its initial
conceptualisations (Papathanassis, 2017; Seraphin, Sheeran, & Pilato, 2018). As Papathanassis (2017)
argues, the problem is about governance and not tourism itself, and about planning and management and the
extent to which communities remain amenable to tourism (Cheer, Coles, Reeves, & Kato, 2017; Rifai, 2017;
Saarinen, 2013, 2018).
Case study
The 28-kilometre Shipwreck Coast study area, from Princetown to the Bay of Islands, is a
magical place. The spectacular limestone stacks and coastal formations, including the Twelve
Apostles and Loch Ard Gorge, are among Australia’s best- known features, drawing millions of
visitors each year. This narrow, fragile environment encompassing the Port Campbell National
Park, the Twelve Apostles Marine National Park, The Arches Marine Sanctuary and the Bay of
Islands Coastal Park is also home to a rich and diverse natural and cultural heritage, townships
and their communities.
The Shipwreck Coast Master Plan (Parks Victoria, p. 4, 2015)
The Twelve Apostles Marine National Park and the Twelve Apostles drive visitation to the Shipwreck
Coast region (Figure 1) (Cheer, 2018). As alluded to in the above quote from The Shipwreck Coast Master
Plan, growing visitation sits awkwardly alongside pressures to maintain the region’s natural values while
also expanding tourismdriven economic development (Parks Victoria, 2015). Awareness of the region is
centred on The Twelve Apostles, one of the most iconic images of the state of Victoria. The Twelve Apostles,
a grouping of limestone stacks that lay adjacent to the coast at Princetown and 19 kilometres from the
township of Port Campbell, is the main drawcard because of the high natural values in situ, including the
Otway Ranges National Park, Port Campbell National Park and the Twelve Apostles Marine National Park
(See Figures 2 and 3), and it is the most visited region in the state and third most in Australia (Parks Victoria,
2015).
Figure 1. Aerial view of the Twelve Apostles and Twelve Apostles Marine National Park boundary (Inset
map – excerpt of south and south-eastern Australia). (Source: Google)
Figure 2. The Twelve Apostles Marine National Park with Twelve Apostles in the background – circa
2016 (Used with permission from Tourism Australia Image Library).
Figure 3. The Twelve Apostles Marine National Park with Twelve Apostles in the centre and top left –
circa 1940s. This photograph suggests noticeable and gradual decline and erosion occurring over the course
of the last 70 years (Used with permission from Matt O’Kane).
The Great Ocean Road and, in particular, the Shipwreck Coast’s early settlement dates back to colonial
Australia and vessels that sank offshore. Stretching for a few hundred kilometres in the southwest of the state
of Victoria, the Shipwreck Coast is a 3-to-4 hour drive from the capital, Melbourne (See Figure 3). Large-
scale agriculture, sheep and dairy farming, cattle and wheat frame are the economy of the region. This harks
back to its early establishment where the region relied on agriculture and logging, and fisheries once had a
strong presence. Akin to many small, regional coastal towns, peripherality introduces constraints to social
and economic development, including depopulation, corporatization of family farms, vulnerability to natural
disasters including bush fires and droughts, and infrastructure shortcomings, especially public transport,
roads, and communications (mobile telephone coverage is unavailable or compromised in some places)
(Cheer, 2017; Green, 2004).
Tourism is the key economic impetus, and with close proximity to Melbourne, the Shipwreck Coast has
become a day trip destination (Cheer, 2017; Han & Cheer, 2018). The failure to optimise tourism growth for
greater local level benefit lies in reconciling competing priorities of economic expansion versus preserving
sense of place, as well as adapting to the shifts away from agrarian livelihoods to a service-driven economy
underlined by tourism (Ibid.). The constraints to optimising tourism are found in the bottlenecks that detract
from the expansion of tourism infrastructure, especially related to funding of critical infrastructure (roads
especially), plus ongoing perturbations that occur including bush fires, landslides and rockfalls along the
Great Ocean Road (Pearson, 2017). At June 2017, the Great Ocean Road region of which the Shipwreck
Coast is central, generated over 6 million unique visitations with more than $AU1.3 billion (Warrnambool
City Council, 2018). Moreover, this unprecedented growth is expected to increase by over 50% to 2025.
The development of tourism infrastructure, including commercial accommodation (hotels and resorts),
has lagged growth in visitation (Parks Victoria, 2015). Consequently, this has stymied efforts to increase
overnight stays and curtailed tourist expenditure. The paradoxical circumstance that arises is framed by high
seasonal visitation in the Australian summer (November to February), with much comprised of groups and
individuals passing through the region en route elsewhere. Unsurprisingly, this has raised local-level angst
where expenditure spent on maintaining public amenities such as toilets and public areas exceeds direct
returns to local stakeholders. Visitation is presently characterised by growing international tourist presence,
especially Chinese tourists, and has amplified infrastructure and tourism service deficiencies (Cheer, 2017;
Han & Cheer, 2018; Pearson, 2017).
All of this raises questions about the resilience of the region’s social and ecological backdrop to cope with
increased visitation, especially during seasonal and daily peaks and whether the government agency charged
with the protection of National Parks, Parks Victoria, can cope with the impact of growing visitation (Koob,
2017). Of note is the clash between efforts from the tourism sector to drive further expansion and local
community angst over the low rates of economic return (Tyler, 2016; Cheer, 2018). This highlights the
paucity of strategic governance where visitation is the key performance indicator, with less attention given
to yield per visitor and length of
stay (Koob, 2017; Zwagerman, 2016). The Shipwreck Coast Master Plan acknowledges the aforementioned
tensions; however, its implementation has been stymied by politicking and stakeholder contention about
ways forward.
Conceptual framework
Preceding the emergence of the Anthropocene in the tourism patois, the employment of nature to service
growing leisure classes had already raised concerns. As Christaller opined in the 1960s, “tourism is drawn
to the periphery of settlement districts as it searches for a position on the highest mountains, and in the most
lonely woods, along the remotest beaches” (1964, p. 95). The human desire to be in and among nature
remains intrinsic to the touristic endeavour, and in the 1960s, there was little to suggest that this was
problematic. The 1960s ushered in the beginning of mass travel and the full-packaged holiday, and as
Christaller (1964, p. 105) exclaimed, “Thanks to airplanes and thanks to our prosperity, destinations in
Africa, in west and south Asia and in the Caribbean Sea are competitive to the countries in Europe”.
Christaller (1964) was prescient in advocating caution and offered a caveat suggesting that “helping induce
the passage of such regions along the same path of former islands or forgotten places…” might actually not
be so laudable.
In the 1970s, as mass tourism hastened, the use of nature for tourism intensified, creating new utilities
and exigencies for what were once mostly adaptable contexts. As Overton critiques in his 1973 depiction of
the opening up of national parks for tourism, this led to the creation of a “new set of social relations which
is [sic] imposed creates conflict and only marginal development” (Overton, 1973, p. 34). The social relations
mentioned were centred on the political, economic and social ramifications of turning nature into
commoditized touristic experiences. The idea to “save” natural areas led to what Overton (1973, p. 35)
describes as “necessary to neutralize discontent and respond to protest from the many groups which make
up the ecology movement”.
Moore’s exposé of tourism in the Anthropocene argues that “contemporary relations of nature and
culture” are central to understanding the Anthropocene in tourism, and that tourism must transform and
recalibrate to adapt to the evolving status quo (2015, p. 191). Moore’s thesis is framed by adaptation and
guided by the question: “To what extent do emergent ventures green wash their involvement in global
assemblages of socioecological exploitation” (2015, p. 195)? Ultimately, as Stonich outlines, political
ecology drivers demand “integrative policy approaches” that “ensure equitable and environmentally
conservative development” (1998, p. 50). This conundrum is evident in the Shipwreck Coast where the
competing and conflicting priorities of development and tourism sidle up against the desire to protect natural
values and sense of place.
While the Anthropocene hastens the urgency for sustainable development, “there are significant
limitations in the extent to which societal actors can respond to the challenges of environment resource
management and sustainability” (Knight, 2015, p. 153). This is discernible in tourism, especially where
disparities in stakeholder influence and agency over the scope and nature of development occur. For
example, local-level capacities to deal with externally driven tourism interventions are very often curtailed
(Seraphin et al., 2018). This calls for “a different kind of global social-politics” (Knight, 2015, p. 156) to
underline sustainable tourism in the Anthropocene, characterised by an understanding that destinations have
tipping points beyond which diminishing returns occur.
Globalisation and neoliberalism loom large in the Anthropocene and underlines global economic systems
that enforce downstream impacts at the micro-level. As Soriano (2017, p. 5) argues, “environmental
degradation is essentially a material problem”, one that stems from consumptive practices tied to resource
use and depletion. Related to this are global flows of capital and predicated on exploiting destination
endowments. This relies on the provisioning of elements within the tourism system and whether a balance
between profit optimisation and social and environmental integrity can be negotiated is central to
sustainability concerns. Soriano sees this as “a sort of vicious cycle that grows as a snowball and shows the
inherent unsustainability of this production mode” (2017, p. 9).
Whether enquiries into the Anthropocene–tourism nexus display “a panicked political imperative to
intervene more vocally and aggressively in an earth transformation run amok” (Robbins & Moore, 2013, p.
9) bears consideration, for within tourism, amenity decline is evidence of system failure. This is obvious
where overcrowding is evident, where the dominance of the built environment overwhelms the natural and