IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcitxx/v25y2022i13p2192-2206.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elite interview, urban tourism governance and post-disaster recovery: evidence from post-earthquake Christchurch, New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Amore
  • C. Michael Hall

Abstract

Despite the long tradition of fieldwork and qualitative research practice in tourism studies, the reporting of methodological notes and reflections is limited in the literature. Many excellent methodological remarks in research reports and graduate theses find few outlets in academic journals and those few contributions that are eventually published often emphasize the novelty of the method rather than crucial aspects such as positionality and embeddedness. This is further evident in urban studies with regard to post-disaster recovery research. This article seeks to fill the current gap in the field by providing a reflective methodological account on fieldwork and elite interviews in post-earthquake Christchurch, New Zealand. It does so by implementing a framework addressing key points in the elite interview process, with emphasis on access to fieldwork sites, power relations, positionality, rapport and ethical issues. The manuscript presents aspects of fieldwork, spatiality and power relations that tend to be overlooked in the literature. Albeit being context-specific, it is argued that the evidence from this study can also have relevance to the understanding of fieldwork in other post-disaster and tourism contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Amore & C. Michael Hall, 2022. "Elite interview, urban tourism governance and post-disaster recovery: evidence from post-earthquake Christchurch, New Zealand," Current Issues in Tourism, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(13), pages 2192-2206, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:25:y:2022:i:13:p:2192-2206
    DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2021.1952940
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13683500.2021.1952940
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13683500.2021.1952940?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:25:y:2022:i:13:p:2192-2206. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.