ICT and sustainable tourismdevelopment: an innovative

perspectiveAlisha Ali

Sheffield Business School, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK, and

Andrew J. FrewSchool of Arts, Social Science and Management,Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, UK

Abstract

Purpose – The aim of this research is to foreground information and communication technology(ICT) as an innovative approach for sustainable tourism (ST) development of destinations. ICT is thetechnology required for information processing which facilitates data processing, information sharing,communication, searching and selection. This paper concentrates on the Abernathy and Clark modeland its usefulness in applying ICT as innovative in managing ST.

Design/methodology/approach – An online survey was administered to destination managersand to eTourism experts. Destination managers were selected as they were identified as the personresponsible for the overall management of a Destination Management Organisation. eTourism expertswere identified as someone who possesses special expertise, knowledge and skills on ICT applicationsto tourism and offered expertise on which ranged from such areas as electronic distribution,recommender systems, user-generated content, online communities, mobile technology, technologyacceptance, tourism networks and Web 2.0. This was followed by semi-structured interviews.

Findings – These ICT tools were found to be innovative for information management anddistribution for critical decision-making. Innovation was fostered through the use of ICT for ST byleading to a better understanding of the tourism product, monitoring, measuring and evaluating,forecasting trends, developing partnerships and engaging and supporting stakeholder relationships.ICT would provide novel ways of approaching marketing, energy monitoring, waste management, andcommunication for destinations.

Originality/value – This research is important in demonstrating the value that technology can haveto ST and further develops the work on tourism innovation theory.

Keywords Innovation, ICT, Destination management, Sustainable tourism,Information and communication technology, Destinations

Paper type Research paper

1. IntroductionInformation and communication technology (ICT) has become a critical element in themodern tourism industry. It has fundamentally transformed the effectiveness andefficiency of tourism organisations, the way they conduct business and consumerinteractions with stakeholders. ICT is the umbrella term, which refers to any productthat stores, retrieves, manipulates, transmits and receives digital data and how thesediffering applications work with each other (Buhalis, 2003). Buhalis and Law (2008)identified that the tourism industry has mainly focused on using ICT for consumer anddemand dimensions, technological innovations and industry functions. However, the

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-9880.htm

Received 13 December 2012Revised 22 June 2013Accepted 23 June 2013

Journal of Hospitality and TourismTechnologyVol. 5 No. 1, 2014pp. 2-16q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1757-9880DOI 10.1108/JHTT-12-2012-0034

JHTT5,1

2

application of ICT for managing the sustainable tourism (ST) development ofdestinations is one area which has been very largely ignored, in the academic literature.

Tourism, like any economic activity, has produced detrimental environmental andsocio-economic effects (Becken and Patterson, 2006) which destroys its chief product, theenvironment (Clarke, 1997). In the literature there is no shortage of examples of theharmful consequences of tourism (Inskeep, 1991; Wall and Mathieson, 2006). Takencollectively, the tourism industry has responded to these challenges by applying theconcept of sustainable development to tourism policy and planning, i.e. ST (Choi andSirakaya, 2006). ST has been regarded as a mechanism for achieving economicdevelopment whilst protecting, preserving and enhancing the environment(Swarbrooke, 1999).

Attempts have been made to apply the concept of ST by developing indicators andmonitoring (Lozano-Oyala et al., 2012; United Nations World Tourism Organisation,2004), eco-labelling (Puhakka and Siikamaki, 2012), codes of conduct (Ayuso, 2007;Ong et al., 2013), educating the tourist (Ballantyne and Packer, 2011) and other bestpractices. However, most of these attempts have been identified with “lack of quality,technical content, reliability, maturity, equity and effectiveness” (van der Duim andvan Marwijk, 2006, p. 449). The alternative developmental approaches such as green,soft, responsible, community-based and eco-tourism have not been successful incombating tourism’s negative impacts (Liu, 2003). It is agreed that ST is a valuableconcept but its implementation has resulted in difficulties (Wall and Mathieson, 2006;Williams and Ponsford, 2009).

The aim of this research is to foreground ICT as an innovative approach for ST.Specifically, it focuses on Abernathy and Clark (1985) model (Figure 1) and itsusefulness in applying ICT as being innovative in managing ST. This model wastheorised for tourism innovation by Hjalager (2002) and subsequently this influentialwork has been well cited in the literature (Pikkemaat and Peters, 2006; Decelle, 2004).Despite this theoretical influence, little research has been done to develop this proposedmodel into further frameworks for tourism (Budeanu, 2012). The model can categorisea wide-ranging collection of ICT-tools and to better understand their innovative usesfor ST. Classical innovation theories have much to offer tourism but there has beenlimited research on these applications (Hjalager, 2002). This research therefore makes

Figure 1.Abernathy and Clark

(1985) model

Conserve/entrenchexistinglinkages

Disruptexisting/creating

newlinkages

Conserve/entrenchexisting

competence

Niche innovationsRegular innovations

Disrupt/makeobsolete existing

competence

Revolutionaryinnovations

Architecturalinnovations

ICT and STdevelopment

3

a contribution in developing tourism innovation theory, identified as research gap(Hjalager, 2010). Conceptualising ICT as an innovative approach to solving some of theailments of ST can be a new way forward for the industry.

2. Literature reviewHall and Williams (2008) commented that tourism could be a commanding force fordriving innovation however research is in this domain is sparse and fragmented(Hjalager, 2005). ICT is a critical catalyst for tourism innovation (EuropeanCommission, 2009; Hjalager, 2010) but destinations have not yet embraced thepower of ICT to connect innovation for tourism planning (Racherla et al., 2008).

According to Schumpeter (1939) innovation is aligned to a new good, new qualityproduct, new methods of production, new markets or marketing and neworganisational or management. The innovative idea has to be fused with a product,process or service for specific industry uses. The word “newness” is often closelyaligned with innovation. However, it does not have to be totally new but rather onlynew to the market or the industry to be considered innovative (Sundbo, 1998). ICT isnot new to tourism but rather its applications to ST are and therefore this viewpointwill be adopted.

A search of the literature (Bahaire and Elliott-White, 1999; Buhalis, 2003; Lawson,2006) identified a number of ICT-based tools which can be used for managing ST.These are identified in Table I.

Abernathy and Clark (1985) (Figure 1) developed a model for analysing thecompetitive implications of innovation based on the concept of transilience and thismodel, explained for the automobile sector, can be generalised for other sectors such astourism. This model categorised innovation in two dimensions, market knowledge andtechnological capabilities of the firm. The horizontal axis of the model identifieswhether specific innovation leads to existing business linkages being either obsolete orcemented, whilst the vertical axis identifies the knowledge and competences needed forproducing the product or service. After the occurrence of an innovation, the modeldifferentiates between the preservation or destruction of market knowledge and theability of the firm to develop the product or service due to the innovation. Thehorizontal axis of the model identifies if particular innovations render current businesslinkages obsolete or lead to enhancement of these existing linkages. On the other hand,the vertical axis recognises the knowledge and competence used for the production ofgoods and services.

Regular, niche, revolutionary and architectural innovation can be achieved througha permutation of technological capabilities and market knowledge. The effects ofregular innovations are usually indiscernible but over a period of time this cumulatesand the impact can be substantial whilst niche innovations build on establishedstructures but not the existing competences (Abernathy and Clark, 1985; Hjalager,2002). It therefore augments the technological capabilities but makes obsolete marketcapabilities. Revolutionary innovations disrupt the existing competences and leads toradical consequences with the existing structures remaining unchanged (Abernathyand Clark, 1985; Hjalager, 2002). Lastly, architectural innovation is wide-ranging sinceit not only involves transformations to the industry but also the environment orcommunity in which it will be used (Hjalager, 2002). It therefore shapes a newarchitecture for the industry.

JHTT5,1

4

ICT-based tools Definition

Carbon calculator Used to determine carbon emissions based on the typeand amount of energy consumed. The result of thiscalculation is known as the carbon footprint and ismeasured in tonnes of CO2

Community informatics Focuses on the design and delivery of technologicalapplications for enhancing community participation anddevelopment through the use of e-mail, bulleting boardsand networks all based on the internet

Computer simulation A simulation of real world settings where models aredesigned to depict how a system operates over time

Destination management system A system that consolidates and distributes acomprehensive range of tourism products through avariety of channels and platforms

Economic impact analysis software Software used to monitor the economic impacts oftourism by providing information on the type andamount of spending

Environment management informationsystems

A combination of computer hardware, software, andprofessional services that integrates disparateinformation about environmental issues in order tomanage the environmental function within anorganisation. This systematically gathers, analyses andreports business information related to environmentalmanagement such as waste tracking and emissionsmonitoring. It allows a company to track, refine, andimprove its environmental management practice

Geographical information systems An information system that can capture, store, manage,manipulate, analyse, integrate and display largeamounts of geographical data

Global positioning system Satellite-based navigation system that providespositioning, navigation and timing services to users inany weather conditions around the world 24 hours a day

Intelligent transport system Telematic systems which provide detailed informationon traffic, information from independent locations,traffic guidance and dynamic routing

Location-based services Collects and delivers information to and from a mobiledevice depending on the automatic location of the user.The aim is to provide targeted information to the userbased on his/her geographic location. Such informationinclude but is not limited to places to visit, eat and stayas well as emergency and health services

Tourism information system Data warehouses that manage business criticalinformation in order to provide quality information onhand to assist in decision making by serving as adecision support system for destination managers

Virtual tourism Based on the internet anyone can experience the culture,history and other points of tourist interests in a visual andinteractive manner without actually visiting the destination

Weather, climate and ocean changeforecasting software

Software used to monitor changes in the weather,climate and ocean

Source: Adapted from Ali and Frew (2010)

Table I.Summary of ICT-based

tools for ST development

ICT and STdevelopment

5

Moreover, this model focuses on the type of innovation that accompanies theintroduction of technology. This is ideally suited to this research, which looks at theapplications of technology for ST. Regular innovations will exist with ICT-basedtools/applications since their impacts will seem insignificant but over a considerableperiod of time this impact builds up and plays a huge role in sustaining the tourismindustry. These innovations can includes new investments in existing technology insupport of ST. Niche type innovations will be created with the use of ICT forsustainability by strengthening the existing structures. Revolutionary innovations willoccur when the types of ICT-based tools used for ST have a disruptive effect on thecompetence of how sustainability is managed. This is accomplished by transformingthe current methods to managing ST, making some of these approaches obsolete and inthe long-term change how tourism is managed overall. Architectural innovationwill occur through the use of ICT for ST since it will change the existing ways inwhich this is manage and will open up new market linkages and users. This ischaracteristic of the creation of new industries and the reformation of old ones.

There are a number of ICT-based tools for ST (Table I) and Abernathy and Clark’s(1985) research provides a functional classification and a better understanding of thetypes of innovation and therefore will be useful in classifying these ICT applicationsfor ST at both a micro and macro level. Additionally, this model focused on the types ofinnovation rather than the behaviour of firms in the innovating process. The intent istherefore to develop concepts that may prove useful in incorporating ICT in thestruggle to make ST more achievable.

The Abernathy and Clark (1985) model is not without it critics, for example themodel has been challenged for being overly static as well as underrating the impact oninnovation produced by existing technologies. Tourism is a dynamic and ever-changingand part of this apparent inflexibility can be reduced by understanding how this modelworks in application to this vibrant industry. Additionally, this research did notconcentrate on developing new technologies but rather examining what already existand how these ICT-tools can be adapted for managing the ST of destinations. Thus,while no model is flawless, in practice this model aids in constructing a usefulframework for addressing ICT as an innovative approach to ST.

3. MethodologyAn interpretivist perspective was selected as the most suitable approach for thisresearch based on the limited extant theoretical and empirical research, theinventiveness of ICT-ST as a research field and exploratory nature of this study.According to Blaxter et al. (2001), research which is or lacks empiricism is best suitedto be inductive. Please see the Appendix for a more detailed discussion on the choiceof this approach.

Data was collected and analysed from two populations. The first had a defininginterest in making ST a more workable reality and these were destination managerswho were identified as the persons responsible for the overall management of aDestination Management Organisation (DMO). The DMO is responsible for the holisticmanagement of tourism at the destination, which encompasses tourism development,planning and marketing activities. The researchers understand that destinations existwhich are not managed by a DMO but may be managed by a government ministry,a local body, a private entity or some other type of arrangement. The person(s) charged

JHTT5,1

6

with the responsibility of managing these entities can indeed be identified asdestination managers. For this research, boundaries were important in giving theproject direction and making this work achievable.

The second population under investigation was eTourism experts identified assomeone who possesses expertise, knowledge and skills on the application of ICT totourism. Examples of such were individuals involved in researching, teaching, usingand implementing ICT in the tourism industry. They offered expertise which rangedfrom such areas as electronic distribution, recommender systems, user generatedcontent, online communities, mobile technology, technology acceptance, tourismnetworks, Web 2.0 and context awareness. They were surveyed since they are forefrontin researching the latest, cutting-edge applications of ICT for tourism and thereforewere instrumental in identifying how ICT would be innovative for ST.

The research methods employed were an online questionnaire supplemented bysemi-structured interviews. These methods complemented rather than competed witheach other (Bryman, 2004) with the literature displaying support for the use of amulti-method approach (Newman, 2004; Bryman and Bell, 2007) and allowed fortriangulation of the collected data and a more thorough understanding of the researchproblem under investigation (Bryman, 2004; Bryman and Bell, 2007). This combinedapproach offered the benefits of identifying respondents who possessed knowledge ofthe topic and the responses provided the underpinning for the issues to be explored inthe interview. The interviews offered scope for more in-depth exploration of issues.

Care was taken in the design of the questionnaire to clearly define the informationbeing sought. It was developed in consultation with the literature on ICT, ST,innovation, Abernathy and Clark (1985) and Hjalager (2002) research and these mainconstructs were operationalised. A panel of experts, which consisted of a surveyauthority and leading academics, reviewed the instrument. A pilot test was thenconducted to determine the suitableness of the questionnaires and test for contentvalidity, relevancy and under-representation of the research topic being studied. Thispilot test also determined if the respondents understood the instructions and gaugedthe length of time taken to answer the questionnaires (Newman, 2004). Criterion andconstruct validity were determined by the review of the questionnaires by a panel ofexperts and the pilot test. External validity was achieved through the samplingprocedures discussed below. This ensured that the sample was representative of thepopulation being surveyed. Reliability was achieved though documentation from thepilot study and the thorough design of the questions by ensuring clearconceptualisation of construct. The questionnaire was structured using the “funnel”technique.

For each of the populations being surveyed, a database was obtained that wasthought to be representative of them. This database of destination managers wasobtained from a leading tourism consultancy and for the eTourism experts fromthe international organisation specialising in the exchange and development ofknowledge on eTourism. These respondents were sent an e-mail by the heads of theseorganisations explaining the nature of the survey and asking for participation. Theresearchers recognised that there may be destination managers and eTourism expertswho were not included in these databases. However, these databases were arepresentative cross-section of the respondents under investigation and there were noother comprehensive listings of members of these two groups.

ICT and STdevelopment

7

There were 434 DMOs active in the database obtained and 37 valid responses werereceived, yielding a response rate of 9 per cent. From a database of 202 eTourismexperts, 23 valid responses were received, this yielding a response rate of 11 per cent.Even though these response rates were low they were by no means extraordinary asWeimiao and Zheng (2010) reported that online surveys average a response rate of11 per cent whilst Sivo et al. (2006) identified that high profile IS journals have reportedresponse rates as low as 3 per cent. Sheehan (2002) observed that a large number ofresponses cannot guarantee generalisation of results and the aim of this survey wasnot generalisability but rather gaining a greater understanding of the issues to be laterinvestigated in the interviews. Appropriate measures were adopted to minimisenon-responses by through two rounds of reminder e-mails and by following theprocedures outlined in Weimiao and Zheng (2010). The non-responses did not differsignificantly from those who did respond and hence did not impact on therepresentativeness of the findings. Therefore, the responses must be interpreted inlight of the purpose of this research.

Sequential sampling was used to select those participants for the semi-structuredinterviews. This approach was appropriately matched to exploratory research and bestused when the researcher wants to discriminate the type of respondents required(Cooper and Schindler, 2003). Thirteen expert interviews were conducted and thisnumber was based on reaching saturation point. It is argued that ten cases areadequate in developing themes and concepts from qualitative data (Eisenhardt, 1989).

The data from the questionnaires were coded and entered into SPSS and analysedusing cross tabulations and descriptive statistics since this provides a simple yetrigorous way of arranging the data and presenting the results (Denscombe, 2007).Complex statistical analysis was not suited to the data set due to the nature ofthe study, size of the sample and the categorical nature of the data. Perhaps moresophisticated statistical techniques could have been used, however, because of thesmall number of responses, the data being largely categorical consisting of questionswith categories which were mainly nominal and ordinal in nature and the exploratory,inductive nature of this research it was felt best to keep the analysis simple.

Each interview was transcribed verbatim upon completion. Adopting an inductiveapproach by using the text of the voice of the interviewees, the interviews were firstbroken down into broad categories and then organised into themes based on thefindings of the literature review. Perakyla (2005) observed that such an approach is themost appropriate choice where the qualitative text plays a complementary role ratherthan being the heart of the research.

4. Results and discussionThe results demonstrated that destinations were in different stages of ICT usage assome were more advanced than others. This provided a different categorisation ofICT-tools uses for ST validating that innovation for one destination may not be thesame for another (Abernathy and Clark, 1985). The majority of DMOs (56 per cent)surveyed strongly agreed that ICT is an innovative approach for ST (Figure 2). Thisaligns closely with the results of the eTourism experts with most agreeing (stronglyagree 39 per cent, agree 49 per cent) as seen in Figure 3.

ICT was seen to be innovative for information management and distribution forcritical decision-making. Innovation would be fostered by leading to a better

JHTT5,1

8

understanding of the tourism product, monitoring of the destination, measuring andevaluating, forecasting trends, developing partnerships and engaging and supportingstakeholder relationships. ICT would provide novel ways of approaching marketing,energy monitoring, waste management, and communication for destinations.

All respondents were also asked to examine the uses of these ICT-basedtools/applications in relation to the modified version of the Abernathy and Clark (1985)model presented earlier. Figure 4 presents a classification of these tools combining theresults of the expert interviews and the findings from the questionnaire. Both DMS andtourism information system (TIS) were identified as regular, niche and architecturalinnovations. A destination already engaging with a DMS and a TIS would view thesetools for ST as primarily a new investment which the DMO already possess,

Figure 2.ICT – an innovative

approach to STdevelopment – destination

managers

Undecided3%

Stronglydisagree 3%

Stronglyagree 56%

Agree38%

Figure 3.ICT – an innovative

approach to STdevelopment – eTourism

experts

Disagree4%

Undecided4%

Stronglyagree 39%

Agree49%

Stronglydisagree 4%

ICT and STdevelopment

9

i.e. regular innovation. A destination which has never engaged with a DMS or a TIS, willconsider this as a change to the way ST and the overall tourism industry is managed. Itwould help manage the tourism resource inventory, support small and mediumenterprises and engage the community in tourism development, i.e. architecturalinnovation. New sectors can be created through the use of ICT for ST such as novel typesof tourism promoted through the DMS or through community involvement. The use ofTIS can alter the shape of the industry by providing destination managers with criticalinformation by standardising tourism statistics. Such standardisation is importantsince this is needed for measuring the enormity of tourism impacts, assisting in thetourism planning process, aiding in possible creation of new sectors or transformingold ones and for marketing and promotion of the destination (Wober, 2000).

These tools were also determined to be niche innovations. This classification alignedwith some of the uses a DMS discussed prior. DMS can be used to create new businessesby forming partnerships and alliances and fostering greater co-operation andcommunication. By extending its uses for ST, a DMS can offer creative products suchas providing a web space where the community and the visitor can interact, offering anavenue for the community to consult on proposed tourism plans and projects, supply

Figure 4.Classification ofICT-basedtools/applications basedon the Abernathy andClark (1985) model

Conserve/entrenchexisting

competence

Disrupt/makeobsoleteexisting

competence

Disruptexisting/

creating newlinkages

Conserve/entrenchexistinglinkages Architectural innovations

Community InformaticsComputer Simulation

Environment ManagementInformation System

Location Based Services

Computer SimulationDestination ManagementSystem Location Based

Services SoftwareTourism Information System

Regular innovations Carbon CalculatorCommunity InformaticsComputer Simulation

Destination Management SystemGeographical Information System

Global Positioning SystemLocation Based Services

Tourism Information System

Niche innovations

Revolutionary innovations

Destination Management SystemGeographical Information System

Intelligent Transport SystemLocation Based Services

Tourism Information SystemVirtual Tourism

JHTT5,1

10

sensitisation information to the tourists for better interpretation of the destination andencouraging more sustainable behaviours and attitudes at the destination.

Location-based services (LBS) was identified in all four categories of innovation.This perhaps indicated that LBS potentially has the power to transform the entireindustry with its usage for ST. With LBS, destination managers can create innovativeexperiences for the tourist at each stage of their travel experience by providing themwith information on a variety of activities relevant to their needs (Liburd, 2005). LBSwas perhaps denoted to be a regular innovation because some destinations are alreadyusing this tool for marketing and promotion (Sharda et al., 2006). The use of LBS isadding an ICT dimension to the existing approaches for managing ST such as visitormanagement techniques and tourist education. It can be a niche innovation since it isfacilitates greater co-operation amongst stakeholders in promoting the destination increative ways for tourists. LBS can be a revolutionary innovation since it can have atransformative effect by presenting new opportunities for destinations to be moresustainable by reducing the level of printed materials and providing information totourists whilst on holiday. It is also architectural since it plays a pivotal role in not onlyhow ST is managed but also how tourism is managed from the uses and applicationsdiscussed earlier. Destination managers will now have the power to communicateseamlessly with the tourist whilst they can share and exchange information with thelocal community and other travellers. Developing consumer-centric technology such asLBS has been identified as critically important for DMOs (Buhalis and Law, 2008) asthis builds rich and rewarding experiences, which considers the environment(Racherla et al., 2008).

Computer simulation was identified as being regular, niche and revolutionary but notan architectural innovation. This can be attributed to the different stages of destinationdevelopment. However, it was not seen as an architectural innovation because the mainuses were modelling, simulating and depicting changes or future scenarios. This is quiteimportant for making the right decisions with regards to ST but this ICT-tool may nothave the ability to create new markets or new sectors or transform the way the tourismindustry is managed. geographical information system (GIS) was seen as both a nicheand architectural innovation. It can be classified as a niche innovation because it canopen up new market opportunities through the identification of sites and attractionssuitable for tourism development, best routes to use at the destination and provide betterways of monitoring indicators at the destination. GIS was also identified as being anarchitectural innovation since it has the power to change the way in which tourism ismanaged. New linkages are created by involving the community and by formingpartnerships to collect data to feed into the system. Through proper analysis of the data,destination managers can make more informed decisions which can create new types oftourism products and services, rejuvenate old sites and attractions and improve parts ofthe destinations which are suitable for development and protect those which are not. Itcan also demonstrate to the community that the DMO is serious about tourismdevelopment hence having an architectural innovation impact. Community informaticswas identified as both a niche and a revolutionary innovation. It was classified as a nicheinnovation since it opens up collaboration and co-operation with different communitygroups to share information and contribute to the tourism development process. It wasidentified as a revolutionary innovation since it can transform how the community isconsulted in tourism matters, allow the community to play a leading role in destination

ICT and STdevelopment

11

development, help educate the tourists and preserve heritage and traditions. Eventhough community participation is deemed to be important for ST, this rarely occurs inpractice (Cole, 2006).

The ICT-tools, which were rated in one category, were environment managementinformation system (EMIS), which was identified as a revolutionary innovation,software (economic impact analysis and weather, climate and ocean changeforecasting) which was seen as a regular innovation. Global positioning systemsand carbon calculators were both identified as niche innovations and intelligenttransport system and virtual tourism as architectural innovations. EMIS may havebeen rated as a revolutionary innovation since many destinations are aware of the usesof an environmental management system (Lee, 2001) but they have limited knowledgeon the ICT aspect of this. EMIS can assist sustainability by monitoring emissions andwaste management. This leads to sounder decision making and aids in currentapproaches such as carrying capacity and indicator development. Similarly, softwarewas identified as a niche innovation since all destinations are already using softwarefor their everyday uses and, therefore, it is a new investment in already existingtechnology. It also adds an ICT dimension for the methods currently used to monitorthe economic impacts of tourism at the destination. Intelligent transport system andvirtual tourism were identified as architectural innovation since they do possess theelements to transform the way tourism is managed. If a proper intelligent transportsystem is implemented, then destinations will be able to manage their energyconsumption and contribute positively to the environment. There is the lingeringquestion as to whether virtual tourism will replace travel (Teo, 2002). A likely trendthat may emerge is that more people may be keen to participate in a virtual holiday(Guttentag, 2010). Large virtual communities exist with many tourism businessesalready having a presence in virtual worlds such as Second Life. DMOs can createstimulating online experiences combined with rich media with well-constructednarratives to guide the tourist through the destination and allow them to share thisexperience with others without physical travel.

Abernathy and Clark (1985) discussed that successful use of the different types ofinnovation requires different types of organisational and managerial skills. DMOs dopossess these capabilities since in recent times their roles have been increasing fromjust a marketing function to overall management of tourism destinations (Ritchie andCrouch, 2003). From the multiple classifications of these ICT-based tools/applications,it is evident that DMOs have to become technology experts and becomegeneralist-specialist in how they manage their destinations. It should be noted thismodified version of the Abernathy and Clark (1985) model needs to be debated andtested for its ability to innovate tourism. As it stands, the model is still conceptual anduntil these ICT-based tools are implemented by DMOs, only then can this model betested and accepted.

5. Conclusions and future workTourism, like any other industry, must strive to innovate for survival in anever-growing competitive market environment. Innovation research in tourism is stillin its infancy and this work sought to progress its development. Addressing theage-old question of how to make the tourism industry more sustainable, it approachedthis challenge by not focusing on the existing debates and the current approaches for

JHTT5,1

12

managing ST but rather suggesting a new strategy through the use of ICT. Moreover,it sought to extend the research in eTourism beyond web marketing, distribution,social networking, virtual communities and consumers’ use of the technology andidentified a new stream of research for the ST literature.

This research has developed ICT as an innovative approach in managing the ST ofdestinations through the use of the Abernathy and Clark (1985) model as seen inFigure 4. It has identified the types of innovations each of these ICT-basedtools/applications can produce for destinations. The Abernathy and Clark (1985) modelis based on the concept of transilience which is the ability of the innovation to influencethe firms’ resources, skills and knowledge. This model was based on the premise ofhow firms increase their competitive advantage in the marketplace. This research didnot focus on competition in order to set boundaries, make the work manageable and tobe able to complete it in a set time frame. However, this does not exclude theresearchers from recognising that the creative use of ICT for ST can providedestinations with a competitive advantage. This in itself contributes to ST by leadingto economic benefits for destinations. It was evident that some ICT-tools can begrouped under more than one categorisations of innovation.

The next phase of this research is testing this model with DMOs using ICT for STfor improvement and refinement. For this approach to be innovative, decision makersnot only need to know the ICT-based tools/applications which can be used, but alsoneed to know what ICT-based tools/applications are available and how best to makeuse of them for their particular needs (Fache, 2000). Decision-makers would be offeredno practical benefit if they were only to be made aware of these tools and rather asystematic framework is essential in helping destinations select the best ICT-tools forthem based on their particular needs relating to tourism development. Therefore,further exploration is warranted in taking forward this avenue and ultimately perhapsproviding an expert-system to aid decision-making.

A further area of research would be to look at the application of ICT from theperspective of the individual tourism businesses at the destination rather than theperspective of the DMO. The consumer perspective and their motivations to visit adestination engaging with technology for assisting the destination to become moresustainable can also be considered. It might also be worthwhile to explore howconsumers make use of the internet in promotion of the principles for ST development.It is hoped that the work presented here has laid the groundwork for progression of theapplications of ICT in ST and will be of direct relevance to both industry and research.

References

Abernathy, J.W. and Clark, B.K. (1985), “Innovation: mapping the winds of creative destruction”,Research Policy, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 3-22.

Ali, A. and Frew, A. (2010), “ICT – an innovative approach to sustainable tourism development”,Journal of Hospitality Application & Research, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 28-58.

Ayuso, S. (2007), “Comparing voluntary policy instruments for sustainable tourism: theexperience of the Spanish hotel sector”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 15 No. 2,pp. 144-159.

Bahaire, T. and Elliott-White, M. (1999), “The application of geographical information systems(GIS) in sustainable tourism planning: a review”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 7No. 2, pp. 159-174.

ICT and STdevelopment

13

Ballantyne, R. and Packer, J. (2011), “Using tourism free-choice learning experiences to promoteenvironmentally sustainable behaviour: the role of post-visit action resources”,Environmental Education Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 201-215.

Becken, S. and Patterson, M. (2006), “Measuring national carbon dioxide emissions from tourismas a key step towards achieving sustainable tourism”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism,Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 323-338.

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C. and Tight, M. (2001), How to Research, 2nd ed., Open University Press,Buckingham.

Bryman, A. (2004), Social Research Methods, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2007), Business Research Methods, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press,Oxford.

Budeanu, A. (2012), “International tourism business: a framework for analyzing innovation in thecontext of holiday package industry”, CLCS Working Paper Series, available at: http://openarchive.cbs.dk/bitstream/handle/10398/8545/Budeanu_WP2_2012.pdf?sequence¼1(accessed 20 March 2013).

Buhalis, D. (2003), eTourism Information Technology for Strategic Tourism Management,Financial Times Prentice-Hall, Harlow.

Buhalis, D. and Law, R. (2008), “Progress in information technology and tourism management:20 years on and 10 years after the internet – the state of eTourism research”, TourismManagement, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 609-623.

Choi, H. and Sirakaya, E. (2006), “Sustainability indicators for managing community tourism”,Tourism Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1274-1289.

Clarke, J. (1997), “A framework for approaches to sustainable tourism”, Journal of SustainableTourism, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 224-233.

Cole, S. (2006), “Information and empowerment: the keys to achieving sustainable tourism”,Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 629-644.

Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, S.P. (2003), Business Research Methods, McGraw-Hill/Irwin,New York, NY.

Decelle, X. (2004), “A conceptual and dynamic approach to innovation in tourism”,paper presented at Innovation and Growth in Tourism Conference, OECD, Lugano.

Denscombe, M. (2003), The Good Research Guide for Small Scale Social Research Projects, 2nd ed.,Oxford University Press, Maidenhead.

Denscombe, M. (2007), The Good Research Guide for Small Scale Social Research Projects, 3rd ed.,Oxford University Press, Maidenhead.

Eisenhardt, M.K. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of ManagementReview, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.

European Commission (2009), ICT and E-Business Impact Studies – 2009, eBusiness W@tch,Bonn.

Fache, W. (2000), “Methodologies for innovation and improvement of services in tourism”,Managing Service Quality, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 356-366.

Guttentag, A.D. (2010), “Virtual reality: applications and implications for tourism”, TourismManagement, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 637-651.

Hall, C.M. and Williams, A.M. (2008), Tourism and Innovation, Routledge, Oxon.

Hjalager, A. (2002), “Repairing innovation defectiveness in tourism”, Tourism Management,Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 465-474.

JHTT5,1

14

Hjalager, A. (2005), “The marriage between welfare services and tourism – a driving force forinnovation?”, Journal of QualityAssurance inHospitality&Tourism, Vol. 6 Nos 3/4, pp. 7-29.

Hjalager, A. (2010), “A review of innovation research in tourism”, Tourism Management, Vol. 31No. 1, pp. 1-12.

Inskeep, E. (1991), Tourism Planning: An Integrated and Sustainable Development Approach,Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY.

Lawson, S. (2006), “Computer simulation as a tool for planning and management of visitor use inprotected natural areas”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 600-617.

Lee, K. (2001), “Sustainable tourism destinations: the importance of cleaner production”, Journalof Cleaner Production, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 313-323.

Liburd, J. (2005), “Sustainable tourism and innovation on mobile tourism services”, TourismReview International, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 107-118.

Liu, Z. (2003), “Sustainable tourism development: a critique”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism,Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 459-475.

Lozano-Oyola, M., Blancas, F., Gonzalez, M. and Calallero, R. (2012), “Sustainable tourism indicatorsas planning tools in cultural destinations”, Ecological Indicators, Vol. 18, pp. 659-675.

Newman, L.W. (2004), Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approach, PearsonEducation, Boston, MA.

Ong, F., Pearlman, M., Lockstone-Binney, L. and King, B. (2013), “Virtuous volunteer tourism:towards a uniform code of conduct”, Annals of Leisure Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 72-86.

Perakyla, A. (2005), “Analyzing text and talk”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, S.Y. (Eds), The SageHandbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 869-886.

Pikkemaat, B. and Peters, M. (2006), “Towards the measurement of innovation – a pilot study inthe small and medium sized hotel industry”, Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality& Tourism, Vol. 6 Nos 3/4, pp. 89-112.

Puhakka, R. and Siikamaki, P. (2012), “Nature tourists’ response to ecolabels in Oulanka PANPark, Finland”, Journal of Ecotourism, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 56-73.

Racherla, P., Hu, C. and Hyun, M.Y. (2008), “Exploring the role of innovative technologies inbuilding a knowledge-based destination”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 11 No. 5,pp. 40-427.

Ritchie, J.R.B. and Crouch, G. (2003), The Competitive Destination: A Sustainable TourismPerspective, CABI Publishing, Wallingford.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007), Research Methods for Business Students, 4th ed.,Financial Times/Prentice-Hall, London.

Schumpeter, J.A. (1939), Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of theCapitalist Process, Martino Pub, New York, NY.

Sharda, N., Georgievski, M., Ahmed, I., Armstrong, L., Brogan, M., Woodward, A., Gurpreet, K.and Clark, M. (2006), Leading-Edge Developments in Tourism ICT and Related UnderlyingTechnologies, STCRC, Gold Coast.

Sheehan, B.K. (2002), “Online research methodology: reflections and speculations”, Journal ofInteractive Advertising, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 56-61.

Sivo, S.A., Saunders, C., Chang, Q. and Jiang, J.J. (2006), “How low should you go? Low responserates and the validity of inference in IS questionnaire research”, Journal of the Associationfor Information Systems, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 35-414.

Sundbo, J. (1998), The Organisation of Innovation in Services, University Press, Roskilde.

Swarbrooke, J. (1999), Sustainable Tourism Management, CAB International, Wallingford.

ICT and STdevelopment

15

Teo, P. (2002), “Striking a balance for sustainable tourism: implications of the discourse onglobalisation”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 459-474.

United Nations World Tourism Organisation (2004), Indicators of Sustainable Development forTourism Destinations: A Guidebook, United Nations World Tourism Organisation, Madrid.

van der Duim, R. and van Marwijk, R. (2006), “The implementation of an environmentalmanagement system for Dutch tour operators: an actor-network perspective”, Journal ofSustainable Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 449-472.

Wall, G. and Mathieson, A. (2006), Tourism: Change, Impacts and Opportunities, PearsonEducation, Harlow.

Weimiao, F. and Zheng, Y. (2010), “Factors affecting response rates of the web survey:a systematic review”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 26, pp. 132-139.

Williams, W.P. and Ponsford, F.I. (2009), “Confronting tourism’s environmental paradox:transitioning for sustainable tourism”, Futures, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 396-404.

Wober, W.K. (2000), “Standardizing city tourism statistics”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 27No. 1, pp. 51-68.

Appendix. Further explanation of the research approachThe researchers were concerned with the understanding of the worldview of the populationsbeing investigated (Newman, 2004). This was important for gaining an accurate representationof the innovative uses and applications of ICT for ST. An interpretivist perspective was thereforewarranted in understanding destination managers and eTourism experts’ opinions andperspectives on the innovative uses of ICT for ST. An interpretive stance would bring forth datathat was not constrained by fixed, analytical categories and would allow the researcher to visitand re-visit the linkages between the data and the theory. Interpretation, rather than statisticalanalysis, was better suited to researching respondents’ perceptions, attitudes and feelings(Denscombe, 2003).

Added to this, to answer the research questions posed; information was required from a largenumber of experts based at various geographic locations all over the world. Due to theinternational scope of this research, a more flexible and open-ended approach was more desirableto elicit the required information. Moreover, Saunders et al. (2007) observed that an interpretivistperspective is best suited to a piece of research when the researcher has empathy andunderstanding of the topic under investigation. Each DMO and eTourism expert possess his/herown individuality on the innovative use of ICT for managing ST.

About the authorsAlisha Ali is a Senior Lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University where she teaches in the areas ofleadership, entrepreneurship, innovation, service excellence and focuses on the specificapplications of these concepts to the hospitality industry. Current research interest includescomputer-mediated sustainability for destinations and tourism businesses. Alisha Ali is thecorresponding author and can be contacted at: Alisha.Ali@shu.ac.uk

Professor Andrew J. Frew is a leading expert in eTourism. He has been active in thehospitality and tourism fields for the past 25 years specialising in the research, application andmanagement implications of information and communication technologies. He has publishedwidely, presented in numerous international forums and is a regular keynote speaker on trendsin ICT research in travel and tourism. Current research interests include electronic distribution,new media and computer-mediated sustainability.

JHTT5,1

16

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints