Tourism in a World of Risks

Essay review Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research (AHTR) An International Journal of Akdeniz University Tourism Faculty ISSN: 2147-9100 (Print), 2148-7316 (Online) Webpage: http://www.ahtrjournal.org/ 2016 Vol. 4 (1) 52-69 TOURISM IN A WORLD OF RISKS Maximiliano E KORSTANJE 1 University of Palermo, ARGENTINA Geoffrey SKOLL Buffalo State College, US Ashley SCHROEDER University of Florida, US Lori PENNINGTON-GRAY University of Florida, US Maite Echarri CHAVEZ University of La Habana, CUBA ABSTRACT Though tourism combines curiosity with security, over the recent decades, we are facing an inflation of risks that caused big problems for policy makers and officials interested in promoting tourism in their respective nations. As a result of this, one might speculate that the future of industry is uncertain. This essay review explores the already existent literature in risk perception applied on tourism fields as well as introduces the theory of attachment to explain how the world is constructed. 1 Keywords Risk Dangers Tourism Mobility Attachment Address correspondence to Maximiliano E KORSTANJE, Department of Economics, University of Palermo, Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA. E-mail: maxikorstanje@arnet.com.ar 52 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) INTRODUCTION The technological breakthroughs accelerated the expansion of tourism and hospitality industries, paving the pathways for millions of travellers to enjoy beautiful and exotic destinations. Important legal rights were issued to grant the right to paid holidays (Lash & Urry, 1994; Clavé, 1998). The current notion of mobility was conducive to the consolidation of trade worldwide. In this context, tourism scholars agree that not only do we dwell in a mobile world, but current technologies help make travel safe and pleasurable (Coles & Hall, 2006; Vanhove, 2012). Despite improved security, many people have serious problems in planning their holidays, because they suffer from phobias, anxiety, and other psychological disorders that reduce the pleasure of touring (Burnham, 2007). Particularly, the attacks to World Trade Centre (WTC) in September 11 were accompanied with a set of diverse risks, dangers that shocked public opinion. Virus outbreaks, quakes and tsunamis, as well as terrorism wreak havoc in the social trust tourism needs to prosper. Further, media and the velocity of replication proper of TV work as faster conduits of terror in the developed societies than other times. The fear of traveling seems to be one such issue remains unexplored in the specialized literature. However, history offers a lot of testimonies and substantial evidence that proofs travels are experiences that wakes up higher levels of anxiety. The Roman historian, Gaius Suetonius Tranquilus (c.70-130 CE), remarks in his biographies that the Emperor Augustus refused to travel in storms after a lightning strike nearly took his life during one of his trips (Suetonius, 1985: 104). No matter the culture or time, the act of traveling not only is an act of trust, but also represents a moment of anxiety since the traveler goes into the unknown. Historically, ancient social institutions, such as hospitality, resulted from the need to control uncertainty (Goody, 1995). This old covenant was often celebrated to weave alliances among ancient tribes to constitute a mutual defense to protect travelers. Since the host does not know the interests of guest and vice-versa, hospitality mitigates the fear in any traveler´s mind (Korstanje, 2010a). The present essay review is double-fold. On one hand it is aimed at discussion the limitations and approaches of risk perception theory as it has been formulated and applied in tourism fields. Secondly, it provides with fresh conceptual alternatives to understand how our system of exploration works. In so doing, the theory of attachment represents a fertile ground to be applied to empirical research. 53 Korstanje et. al. CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION Sociologically, the act of traveling is based on trust. Whenever the subject abandons its home, it is subject to the liminality of uncertainness. Tourists not only are unfamiliar with the landscape they gaze, but should be protected from any external aggression. Then, the quest of novelty corresponds with the needs of discovering new sensations that help revitalizing the mind from frustrated oppression of working life. However, security plays a crucial role in order for tourist can maximize their pleasure. In a climate of controlled-risk, tourism needs from hospitality to bolster a fluid dialogue between tourist-delivering and receiving societies. Though it was a peace-builder, recently a set of different exigencies put tourism in a precarious position. The onset of the twenty-first century brought disasters, virus outbreaks, and terrorist attacks. They created a strong sense of uncertainty and instability that directly affected the tourism and hospitality businesses. The contributions of Roehl and Fesenmaier (1992) were recovered from the dust of oblivion and cited by many researchers and policy makers (McCartney, 2008). The ephemeral logic of tourism or prosumption as Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010) observed, is based on the individual experience. Although tourism seems to be a resilient industry, no less true is that it is sensible to the upsurge of crises and many other bad advertising. This is the reason why Hall, Timothy and Duval (2003) call attention to a new kind of understanding of risk and communication which depends on the media and other uncontrollable variables. They raise the question of how much safety is associated with poverty or social resentment. They say that a priority should be the formation of committees of crises to propose an allencompassing evaluation of risks (Hall et al., 2003: 8-16). Studies of risk have posed as a priority for policy makers over last decades. This happens because we are living a state of inflation respecting to risk perception. The Study of Risks in Tourism Studies of risk in tourism have adopted two different positions. One uses the socio-demographic variables of tourists, while the other focuses on their psychology. For present purposes we review only the psychologically oriented studies. Certainly, both voices have limitations and assertions. On one hand, risks should be conceived within a culture which gives shape. For example, some Mexican aborigines who live alongside a volcano do not feel they are in an imminent danger despite the 54 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) several alarms issued by scientists. For their cosmology, disasters are resulted from the God´s rage by the introduction of western technology to measures quakes and volcano activity. This scenario contrasts with Western culture where risk is previously identified and reduced by modern science. This suggests that risk perception varies by culture and time. Detractors of cultural explanation of risk explain that there are arithmetical models that can predict risks before they take room, no matter than culture or perception. This point of entry in the discussion alludes to the idea that risk exists irrespective to subjective perception. Even, in some contexts, fear allows the preservation of organism in the same way in humans like in animals. However, why these fears evolve diverse meaning according to individual cognitive structure is what cannot be explained with accuracy. To put this in bluntly, while some of us have frightened by storms days, others avoids spiders. There are not mathematical models that can infer on the subjective world of peoples. This is exactly what leads Plog (1973; 1991) to draw an innovative system of exploration, which was originally financed by airline companies. This was aimed to explain why some tourists showed extreme fear of flying. He found that some passengers are afraid of traveling because of their character structure. Plog´s model involves three factors: the attachment to territory, anxiety, and impotence. Following a continuum, Plog (1973; 1991) establishes three behavioral types for adaption to the environment. The alo-centric type seeks out new places and customs. The psycho-centric type is oriented toward ritual and fears new situations. The mid-centric type is a mixture of alo and psycho-centric types. Plog (1973; 1991) argues that fear of flying is the adaptive behavior of people who have a strong attachment to territory. Though he was widely criticized because of a lack of rigor in the construction of the subtypes (Hoxter-Lee & Lester, 1988; Castaño, 2005: 89), Plog (1973; 1991) paved the way for the advance of other studies that looked at anxiety as the main factor in risk perception. Reisinger and Mavondo (2005) noted that there is a high correlation between risk perception and the degree of anxiety a person may feel. They found that tolerance of uncertainty seems to play a vital role in threat perception. Aversion to risk is associated with low levels of tolerance before uncertainty. Lepp and Gibson (2008) explain that the tourist trip presents two contrasting tendencies: the quest for novelty and risk aversion. Taking their cue from the advances of Plog (1973; 1991), they hold that the type of personality correlates with the behavior of tourists. Those tourists who have developed a sensation-seeking type accept new sensations while minimizing awareness of risk (Lepp & Gibson, 2008). A 55 Korstanje et. al. study based on a large sample formed by 1,180 visitors coming from 14 different countries, reveals that risks are invoked at the time of decision making process. At a first glance, hazards such as SARS or earthquakes represent bad marketing. What Kozak, Crotts, and Law (2007) discovered is that some destinations seem not to be affected by risk while others collapse as tourist destinations. The tolerance of uncertainty is vital in trying to understand tourist behavior (Kozak et al., 2007). One of the conceptual limitations of this research, however, is the ignorance of how emotions affect the construction of personality. Anxiety cuts through the biography of an individual. We are unable to operationalize anxiety at different levels. Also, researchers misjudge the role of anxiety in character formation. It operates beyond the autonomy of social variables such as age, income, or gender. To solve this problem, Weng-Bin, Ming-Hsu and Chien-Lung (2009) say that mood is sensitive to the fear of traveling. For example, their study shows how those passengers who suffer sadness tend to minimize risks less than anxious personalities. The sense of hopelessness and depression is related to a disengagement of the self from the environment (Weng-Bin et al., 2009). Other valuable studies focused on the connection of psychological structure and risk perception. The evaluation of tourist destination is given not only the atmosphere of risk, which sometimes is shaped by the media, but also by the subject adaptation to that risk (Aschauer, 2010). In this token, Fuchs, Uriely, and Reichel (2013) suggest that the situation of dangers may be politically manipulated as disciplinary mechanism of control. Starting from the premise, the act of traveling request from trust, to cross over the boundaries between the certainness and uncertainness, the political ideology plays a vital role in explaining why some destinations are preferred over others. This means that if travelers ideology is compatible with socialist countries, there would have no internal discrepancies to visit China or Cuba, while more capitalist countries would be avoided. Tourism literature agrees that experts and lay people have contrasting types of risk perception. Experts tend to make correct evaluations of possible hazards. Lay people go into a panic because of biased conceptions of risks (Sjoberg, 1999; Krewski, Turner, Lemyre, & Lee, 2012). TA parallel may apply by to tour operators or travel agents who are familiar with the pitfalls and problems of a trip. Wang, Jao, Chan and Chung (2010) conducted research with 310 tour guides and tour leaders coming from 75 different agencies in Taiwan. To correct the classic texts such as Roehl and Fesenmaier (1992) and Wang et al. (2010) criticized 56 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) abstract categories which cannot be contextually adapted. They also point out that many researchers use students who have no familiarity or experience with the fieldwork. It is important to classify risk according to its nature. Some risks are inherent in the tourists’ decisions while others are external. Tourists tend see more danger in those risks where their personal safety is at stake (Wang et al., 2010). Though this wave obtained good outcomes that helped policy makers to understand the complex world of consumers, some voices have criticized this theory by some epistemological problems. Risk Perception and Its Radical View From psychology, Larsen (2007) criticizes risk perception theory because it misjudges the difference between worries and risks. Since worry is a cognitive construal of autonomous of experience, there is no reason to assume risks influence decision making. The probabilities of having an accident on roads may be a primary risk for tourists although it does not represent any worry for them. Worries trigger emotions that help recognition of a threat (Larsen, 2007). Behind the sphere of cognition, worries involve internal sentiments and emotions which are activated by uncertainty (Larsen, 2009). Traumatic experiences from the past create a conditioning effect to sensitize people to adverse situations. A recent investigation by Vastfjall, Peters and Slovic (2008) evinced that disasters and trauma create negative moods. Reminders of the possibility of a new disaster reduce the horizon of perception. This negative mood varies according to the previous experiences of the subject. For example, those who have suffered a tragedy develop a stable negative perspective on life while others who did not experience the same situation ignore the alarm signals (Vastfjall et al., 2008). These observations have been refuted by Hunter (2006) who has made a study based on the experience of 369 pilots. Those who had suffered situations of danger consider that air transport is safer than others who had not lived through a similar experience (Hunter, 2006). However, sometimes the conditions of trauma may be replicated to achieve political loyalties. It is unfortunate classic techniques and instruments for collating information as questionnaires, formal interviews do not work for Trauma issues. Therefore, risk perception theory has not advanced in this direction in recent years. In perspective, the problems for interpreting the outcomes derive from intrusive methods such as questionnaires and closed-ended interviews (Slovic, 1987; Slovic & Weber, 2002; Korstanje, 2013). These outcomes are not complemented by 57 Korstanje et. al. qualitative methods to reach alternative viewpoints. The current state of art in risk-related research would be enriched if qualitative views are adopted by researchers. In this vein, the present paper wants to fill that gap (Korstanje, 2010b; 2010c; 2011a; 2011b; 2012; Korstanje & Clayton, 2012). Risk perception theory shows some limitations which merit to be discussed in this section. At a first glance, there is not clear definition of what a risk means. Though perception is inherited to the cognitive structure of mind, not all personalities develop a risk-avoidance attitude. Adventure tourism monopolized the experience of those who are prone to face risky activities (Buckley, 2007). Most certainly, risk confers to tourists a veil of status because they dared to face the danger. They become exceptional in many senses, following the archetype of heroism. This is exactly what some fieldworker noted in Japan. In this country, a dangerous dish as frightful globefish is over-valorized by diners who pay exorbitant sums of money. Beyond its taste, what makes these fish much more attractive than other dishes seems to be the peligrosity of its poison. A second point which limited the risk-studies is the used methodology to conduct the fieldwork. Based on open or closed-administered questionnaires, risk research evinces the correlation among variables. However, correlation is often prone to measure a phenomenon. Far from being descriptive, for example, one might speculate that genre keeps certain correlation with risk perception. This belief leads to researchers to admit that males perceive fewer risks than females. In view of that, larger samples may validate the outcome, but if fieldworkers delve into this correlation, they find contradictory evidences. Women are educated not only to care the family, but also by alarming men about the potential hazards. Likewise, men are socialized to repress their sentiments, facing risky situations. In other terms, their archetype of masculinity is jeopardized whether they fears are acknowledged. Manning (1989) recognizes the importance of understanding that social practice is embedded in a structure whereby discourse is articulated. Understanding how the narratives of safety are orchestrated, over-rated or silenced, researchers can get a more profound idea of the object of study. This is the reason why questionnaires and interviews alone are not useful in understanding social issues. Another additional problem lies in the fact that sometimes there is a dichotomy between what interviewees say and do. One of the contradictions of positivism consists in the acceptance of what people say as an objective source of scientific validation. Let’s explain my own 58 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) experience in the field when I entered to study Cromañon`s tragedy in Buenos Aires, Argentina. During my fieldwork, a teenager came to me one day to explain me further on the problem I was investigating. I accepted his invitation assuming he had much to say. The interview lasted roughly 5 hours and was tape-recorded. The information I obtained from this young was very important for me at a preliminary stage. Nonetheless, with the passing of months I have advanced my ethnography comparing the collated information by what I can hear and see. Not only I realized that the original interview was completely false, because the involved keyinformant wanted to attract attention and exaggerated his stories, but he felt the needs to tell something to me. The importance of this story was not determined by its credibility. He had not lost anyone in the disaster of Cromañon, though developed a strange attachment for the event, for the other´s suffering. This empathy led him to alter his sense of reality. Paradoxically, although this interview was a fake, it underpinned the main hypotheses in my research opening the doors to new cosmologies and opportunities to be empirically validated. This story though false shed light on my investigation. Douglas and Wildavsky (1983) have written a seminal book teaching how good investigation can be done in the fields of risk perception. Douglas, a pioneer scholar interested in exploring the connection of fear, evil, and risk, argued that psychological fear represents an attempt to react when faced with a hostile situation. To some extent, the preservation of culture is at stake in contexts of uncertainty or instability. When socialized, fear unites a society. Without fear, Douglas added, societies would experience substantial fragmentation (Douglas, 1992). In subsequent studies, Douglas (1992) developed a new thesis arguing that risk, danger, and sin are intertwined social constructs. Sin and risk give further legitimacy to the status quo, which would otherwise discredit privileged groups if they did not give solutions to lay people. Risk and sin both provide rationalizations for how the world works. The potentiality of threat confers legitimacy for social solidarity and status hierarchies (Douglas, 1992). Waterton and Wynne (2001) conducted an investigation in towns such as Sellafield (UK), which are next to nuclear plants. Under some conditions, inhabitants at risk of dangerous exposure intellectualize their situation, repressing their fear and displacing it or negating it with sentiments such as pride and stoicism to rationalize their persistence in a dangerous place. This reveals that risk may confer strong attachments of identity where real dangers become a criterion of status and social distinction. Unless the qualitative view is introduced in risk perception 59 Korstanje et. al. research, biased diagnoses may lead scholars to inaccurate or partial explanations. Third, risk-research looks to propose alternative courses of action to mitigate risks, ignoring what Giddens (1991) called “the paradoxical condition of risk”. Policies waged to prevent potential risks. In this sense, Beck (1992) has explored the contradiction of technology which originally used to make from this world a safer place, prompted the Chernobyl`s nightmare. He has argued that modernity opened new global risks, which were alien to the medieval world view. Chernobyl in the Ukraine was the symbolic of the role played by technology in fabricating new risks. In Beck’s view (Beck, 1992), technology had helped enhance security, but today it generates new and dire risks that threaten human existence. In Beck’s “risk society” (Beck, 1992) the old modes of production, which fabricated commodities, have turned into methods that produce risks. Parallel to Beck (1992), Giddens (1991) acknowledged globalization as a project based on two key factors. The first is that money has come to serve as a mechanism of connecting presence with absences, or needs with their satisfaction throughout the world. The second element is a network of experts, who not only evaluate potential risks but also devise ways for mitigating risks. Starting from the premise that experts monopolize the trust of lay people, for Giddens, risk is what society creates to sustain its efficient functioning (Giddens, 1991). In contrast to Beck (1992) and Giddens (1991), Luhmann (1993) criticized the discourse of risk because it prompts an unabated alarmism that alters the public consciousness. Unfortunately, Beck (1992) did not contemplate the distinction between risk and threat. While risk signifies a previous decision by the self, threat refers to something external to the self. A terrorist attack, an airplane accident, or natural disasters are threats, since the victims have no way to reverse the situation. The passengers in an airplane crash have no way of avoiding the harm. In contrast, for the air travel company owner, who opted to reduce costs, the accidents are a risk. Generally, those who make the decision are generators of risks. They are not the same as those who face the risks (Luhmann, 1993). Is an airplane accident a responsibility of passengers or a charge over the company? The discourse of risk is woven in order for elite not to be interpelated by citizenship. That way, risk is often conceived as a problem of victims. The success of the management consists in controlling and reversing the risks other generated. In so doing, the agent assumes the responsibility for decisions made in other circles (Sennett, 2011). 60 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) In this token, Richardson (2010) contends that threats which jeopardize society are introduced in the social system by means of knowledge. Risk, in these terms, would be the efforts to intellectualize the future by offsetting costs and benefits. The final decision made on the possibility to face or avoid the damage is given by the degree of contingency, with respect to the problem to be solved (Richardson, 2010). This seems to be the reason why technology designed to mitigate risks under some conditions of uncertainty, generates new risks. Last but not least, the media coverage of risky situations can lead to forge ethno-centric viewpoints, where the “Other” is portrayed as dangerous, a potential source for terrorism mushrooming. A seminal text, edited by Professor Mahmoud Eid (2014) draws the attention on the role played by the media in the coverage of terrorist attacks. Recently, AlBaghdadi the Commander in Chief of IS (Islamic State) proclaimed the “jihad” against the luxury centers of mass-consumption, tourist resorts and places of recreation worldwide. Undoubtedly, this exhibits not only the concerns of West since its style of life was in jeopardy, but what is presented as the hallmark of its supremacy over other cultures. A second problem relates to the fact that there is a dependency of media to cover terrorist attacks. This begs some more than interesting questions, is the media conducive to terror-tactics? Is this terror used to manipulate internally the citizens? Eid (2014) introduces a new term, terroredia to denote a connection between terrorism and media. Not only terrorists have fluency in English to disseminate a message to audiences (even many of them are English native speakers which reveals a crisis in the modern world), but also they are cognizant with the digital technologies as websites, Facebook and other social networks. As many other forms of violence, terrorism appeals to captivate the attention of modern nation states. Terrorism has become in a commodity which gives further legitimacy to professional politicians. The war on terror, post 9/11, attempted to confront with the needs of struggling against an invisible enemy. As a result of this, terrorism engulfed as a part of postmodern politics. The US obsession for terrorism, as well as its tactics in counter-terrorism seems to feed back an unending atmosphere of fear. The struggle against terrorism should embrace ethics as the main flagship. Otherwise, West will fall in a campaign of “demonization” where the non-white “Other” will be silenced. As Mahmoud Eid (2014) puts it, we are educated to imagine terrorism is a criminal act while media are a positive phenomenon. Both sides are being helped each other, simply because the treatment of media facilitates the 61 Korstanje et. al. terrorist to achieve their goals, while the perpetration of attacks gives substantial content and debate to journalism. Understanding terrorism as a try of communicating a violent message, this project exerts a considerable criticism to free-value media. The mediatization of terrorism corresponds with a tactic further beneficial for terrorists than governments. The main thesis in Eid`s book (Eid, 2014) is that terrorism and media’s swamp is explained by the co-dependency to fabricate “oxygen”. Without terror, both parties would be never benefited as now they are (Eid, 2014). Far from its valuable advance, risk perception theory today is unable to explain why some personalities are open to new experiences, while others are closed. Quite aside from this discussion, psychology and anthropology have much to say in the ways the system of exploration, fixed in the early stage of infants, marks our sense of security, even when we are touring. The Secure-Base and Attachment Theory The legacy of psychoanalysis has persisted in the epistemology of social sciences from its inception. Though discredited by the “falsacionism”, physchonalisis evidenced an attachment between the child and its mother, as a most significant axiom of the discipline (Schur, 1960; Winnicott, 1960; Spitz, 1969; Freud, 1995). Depending on how this bondage evolved, the psychological system as well as the intra-psychic energy works. In Freudian terms, an extreme fear as phobia, exhibits the combination of contrasting feelings which threaten to disorganize the personality. By avoiding the frightening object, the ego can better integrate the personality. In other terms, the phobia works as a catalyst to protect the ontology of mind (Freud, 1998). In fact, psychoanalysis and anthropology were historically interlinked. Not only Freud was cognizant with anthropological studies, but also both disciplines share epistemological concerns such as,  The study and qualitative methods to interpret events, not as they happened but as they are symbolized by men.  The qualitative viewpoint serves to infer the gaps between what people do and say. Field-working is a valid attempt to be there watching human behaviors.  A heuristic logic of the theory. 62 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) Methodologically, psychoanalysis discovered that many of attitudes, beliefs and behaviors are determined by patterns which can be studied and observed. These patterns associate to experiences faced during the early-stage of the infant. Though the child-mother bondage is not determinant for Freud, it paves the ways for experimental studies which were organized by Bowlby (1986) to present an innovative thesis. Working in the object relations school of psychoanalytic ego psychology, he (1986) created a new conceptual model to understand the influence of the mother during the life span. He demonstrated the connection between attachment and the ego, but also the importance of the symbolic connection of mother and her child. From birth, the child seeks security through proximity with its parents. Depending how its needs are addressed, the child will develop a sense of security along a continuum. For Bowlby (1986; 1989), the attachment, which can be observed in ethological studies of non-human animals, corresponds with a biological bond that serves as a protection against (Bowlby, 1986; 1989). The smile between the child and its primary caretaker is the primary form of symbolic communication, which establishes a bridge of trust. This nonverbal communication stage begins with exchanges that create a strong emotional bond (Crain, 2015). In his preliminary work, Bowlby (1986; 1989) takes up a polemic within the psychoanalytic circles. He opposed the classic view of maternal attachments in which breast loss is sufficient to explain the disorganization of personality. Instead, according to him, it is the possibility of losing the mother’s love that is important for the child. Freud (1960) replied that personality is not determined only by the first days of infants. She pointed out that we perceive things in different ways depending on our stage of maturation. How does Bowlby (1986; 1989) validate his observations? Even if Bowlby (1960; 1986; 1989) never conducted empirical research with children, other cases and published-working papers served to orchestrate his theory. Ainsworth (1979) conducted an experiment in nurseries school in Africa and US. Per her observations, children manifested diverse symptoms according to the time they were attached to their mothers. She found that children developed diverse behavior according to the separation with their mothers. The timing of separation was of paramount importance to understand each type of reaction. Two types were proposed by Ainsworth (1979): anxious-avoidant and anxiousambivalent. Building on this work, Main (2001) uses life stories of parents from their biographies. She found differences from Ainsworth´s results (1979), but basically, more commonalities. Main identified three sub-types: 63 Korstanje et. al. secure autonomous, insecure-disregarded, and insecure-concerned. Some study participants whom she catalogued as secure autonomous were able to narrate stories of their childhood, but others had difficulties in expressing their emotions. Bowlby (1960) pointed out that the effects of separation persist throughout the life-spans. Maternal loss produces a stage of protest which if it remains unresolved activates pain and resistance. The desire for exploration deteriorates if the child has not received the love of its care-takers (Bowlby 1960). Similar results were noted by Anderson (1972) who said that toddlers try sorties of varying distances from their mother, and then return to the maternal secure base when they feel insecurity. If the child loses sight of the mother, its exploration ends by returning to her. The legacy of Bowlby (1960; 1986; 1989), Ainsworth (1979), Main (2001), and Anderson (1972) were of vital significance for psychology since it showed that the importance of maternal figure in children and throughout the lifespan (Klauss & Kennell, 1985; Crain, 2015). Bowlby (1960; 1986; 1989) was a pioneer in confirming that our system of exploration or exploratory behavior varies according to the type of attachment and the connection between the mother and infant. The fear that everyone feels when going through the unknown may be explained by the failures in early socialization, as attachment theory was formulated by Bowlby (1960). This pattern would accompany adults during all their life-span. Following this, interesting correlations between schizophrenia and psychological pathologies in adulthood can be done using the conceptual background of attachment theory (Stern, 2000; Casullo, 2005). Some studies revealed that the original pattern of attachment may change during the life span (Crain, 2015). For example Spitz (1960) agrees with Bowlby’s (1989) general conclusions about attachment, but he insists that considering the loss of love as the primary factor to explain social behavior is a mistake. Trauma may evolve in the mind from a variety of sources. Belsky (1999) highlighted the importance of the context to infer the validity of some attachment types over others. Sometimes, we valorize secure-autonomous type over others, but this is a clear error. If society faces a deep demographic decline, the insecure-concerned type will surface. Far from being counter-productive, this will lead to raise the current fertility rates. Korstanje (2008) exerted a critique against attachment theory respecting to the times information and evidence was gathered. There are no longitudinal observations of how studied children evolved to adulthood, or whether events happened as they reminded. After all, a bad or good mother follows only an archetype of how she is 64 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) remembered by the child, not exactly as how she really was. Attachment theory alludes to a symbolic archetype of care-takers which sometimes bespeaks of the internal world of patient. Moreover, using questionnaires and interviews of adults elicits responses which may have been elaborated and distorted by the study subjects, and therefore cannot guarantee the facts as they really happened. A mother’s memory is subject to many sources of distortion. Quite aside from this, the application of attachment model has been correlated with romantic relations (Hazan & Shaver, 1990; 1994; Casullo, 2005), problems in education (Fonagy, Gergely, Jurist, & Target, 2002; Robbins & Zacks, 2007), sociological issues such as adaptations to modernity (Giddens, 1991), and, most pertinently to the present paper, resistance of subject to travel and fear of flying (Korstanje, 2010a; 2010c; 2011a; 2011b; 2013). Due to its complexity, clinical theory as well as secure-base theory has not been used in tourism-related research, or in risk perception studies. Interesting hypothesis of work can be obtained from reading this theoretical platform. In next, we discuss the main ideas secure base theory provides for tourism-readers. CONCLUSION As early noted, tourism is bereft between the wall and blue sea. Though its resiliency, a wide range of new risks pose serious challenge for the industry in next years. We have discussed to what an extent, attachment theory and secure base models offer fertile grounds to expand empirical research. Diverse cultures develop a variety of attachment types, which mould different forms of adaptations to risks. While some cultures are risk-oriented, others are risk-avoiders. Attachment behaviors explain why those who have been socialized in atmosphere of conflict and violence developed an insecure adaptation to Enviroment, as well as their exploratory system turned damaged. One of the aspects of culture that equals mother bondage is the sense of lost-paradise. Tourism at some extent, not only emulate lost paradise, but also the lost mother womb. Two working hypothesis are of paramount importance to be continued in next approaches. Following Bowlby´s (1960; 1986; 1989) legacy, infants who grown up into insecure types are not only more sensitive of risks, but also affrighted to get out their homes, while secure-base personalities follow a risk-seeker type of exploration. Secondly, attachment theory can 65 Korstanje et. al. be applied to national contexts complementing the already-existent risk perception literature and its outcomes. REFERENCES Ainsworth, M. S. (1979). Infant–mother attachment. American Psychologist, 34 (10), 932. Anderson, J. W. (1972). Attachment behaviour out of doors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Aschauer, W. (2010). Perception of tourists at risky destinations. A model of psychological influence factors. Tourism Review, 65 (2), 4-20. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity (Vol. 17). London: Sage. Belsky, J. (1999). Interactional and contextual determinants of attachment security. In J. Cassidy and P. R. Shaver (Ed), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 249-264). New York: Guilford Press. Bowlby, J. (1960). Grief and mourning in infancy and early childhood. In The psychoanalytic study of the child (pp. 9-52). New York: International University Press. Bowlby, J. (1986). Vínculos afectivos: Formación, desarrollo y pérdida. Madrid: Editorial Morata. Bowlby, J. (1989). Una base segura: Aplicaciones clínicas de la teoría del apego. Buenos Aires: Paidos. Buckley, R. (2007). Adventure tourism products: Price, duration, size, skill, remoteness. Tourism management, 28 (6), 1428-1433. Burnham, J. J. (2007). Children's fears: A pre 9/11 and post 9/11 comparison using the American fear survey schedule for children. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85 (4), 461-466. Castaño, J. M. (2005). Psicología social de los viajes y el turismo. Madrid: Thomson Ed. Casullo, M. M. (2005). Vínculo de apego romántico en adultos, escala de auto evaluación. Psico-Diagnosticar, 14, 53-73. Clavé, S. A. (1998). La urbanización turística: De la conquista del viaje ala reestructuración de la ciudad turística. Documents D'anàlisi Geogràfica, 32, 17-43. Coles, T., & Hall, C. M. (2006). Sobre el turismo y la movilidad en tiempos de movimiento y conjetura posdisciplinar. Política y Sociedad, 42 (2), 181-198. Crain, W. (2015). Theories of development: Concepts and applications. London: Routledge. Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and blame. New York: Routledge Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. (1983). Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press. Eid, M. (2014). Exchange terrorism oxygen for media airwaves: The age of terroredia. Pennsilvania: IGI global. Fonagy, P., Gergely, G., Jurist, E. L., & Target, M. (2002). Affect regulation, mentalization, and the development of the self. New York: Other Press. Freud, A. (1960). Discussion of Dr. Bowlby´s paper In The psychoanalytic study of the child (pp. 53-62). New York: International University Press. Freud, S. (1995). Obras Completas (Vol. 14). Buenos Aires: Amorrortu Editores. Freud, S. (1998). Análisis de la fobia en un niño de cinco años. Obras Completas, X, 7-84. Buenos Aires: Amorrortu Editores. 66 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) Fuchs, G., Uriely, N., & Reichel, A. (2013). Vacationing in a terror-stricken destination tourists’ risk perceptions and rationalizations. Journal of Travel Research, 52 (2), 182-191. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the Late Modern Age. California: Stanford University Press. Goody, J. (1995). Cocina, cousine y clase: Estudio de sociología comparada. Barcelona: Gedisa. Hall, C. M., Timothy, D., & Duval, D. (2003). Security and tourism: Towards a new understanding?. In C. M. Hall, D. J. Timothy and D. T. Duval (Eds), Safety and security in tourism: Relationships, management and marketing (p. 1-18). New York: Haworth Hospitality Press. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (2), 270–80 Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). Attachment as an organisational framework for research on close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 5, 1–22 Hoxter-Lee, A., & Lester, D. (1988). Tourist behaviour and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 9, 177-178. Hunter, D. R. (2006). Risk perception among general aviation pilots. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 16 (2), 135-144. Klaus, M., & Kennell, J. (1985). Maternal infant bonding. Saint Louis: Mosby Ed. Korstanje, M. (2008). Turismo y crítica a la teoría de la base segura en Bowlby. Revista Electrónica de Psicología Iztacala, 11 (2), 115-137. Korstanje, M. E. (2010a). La isla y el viaje turístico-una interpretación del filme de Michael Bay, desde el psicoanálisis y el pensamiento filosófico moderno y contemporáneo. Anuario Turismo y Sociedad, 11, 155. Korstanje, M. (2010b). El 11 de septiembre y la teoría de la percepción del riesgo. Pasos, 8 (2), 389-402. Korstanje, M. E. (2010c). Las formas elementales de la hospitalidad. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Turismo, 4 (2), 86-111. Korstanje, M. E. (2011a). The fear of traveling: A new perspective for tourism and hospitality. Anatolia, 22 (2), 222-233. Korstanje, M. E. (2011b). Why risk why now? Conceptual problems around the risk perception in tourism industry. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em turismo, 5 (1), 4-22. Korstanje, M. (2012). Los Riesgos Y el sistema turístico: Una nueva aproximación (Risks and Tourism System: A New Approach). Anuario Turismo y Sociedad, 13, 99. Korstanje, M. E. (2013). Estar protegido: El rol de las compañías de asistencia al viajero en el sistema turístico. El Periplo Sustentable: Revista de turismo, desarrollo y competitividad, 25, 43-76. Korstanje, M. E., & Clayton, A. (2012). Tourism and terrorism: Conflicts and commonalities. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 4 (1), 8-25. Kozak, M., Crotts, J., & Law, R. (2007). The impact of the pereption of risk on international travellers. International Journal of Tourism Research. 9 (4), 233-242. Krewski, D., Turner, M., Lemyre, L., & Lee, J. (2012). Experts vs. public perception of population health risk in Canada. Journal of Risk Research, 15 (6), 601-625 Larsen, S. (2007). Aspects of a psychology of the tourist experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7 (1), 7-18. Lash, S., & Urry, J. (1994). Economies of signs and space (Vol. 26). London, Sage. Larsen, S. (2009). What tourists worry about: Construction of a scale measuring tourist worries. Tourism Management, 30, 260-265. 67 Korstanje et. al. Lepp, A., & Gibson, H. (2008). Sensation seeking and tourism: Tourist role, perception of risk and destination choice. Tourism Management, 29, 740-750. Luhmann, N. (1993). The sociology of risk. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Main, M. (2001). Las categorías organizadas del Apego en el infante, en el niño y en el adulto: Atención flexible versus inflexible bajo estrés relacionado con el apego. Traducción en español y re-publicación de Revista de Psicoanálisis, Apertura Psicoanalítica. Número 8. Manning, P. K. (1989). Semiotics and social theory. In Action and structure: Research methods and social theory (pp. 80-98). London: Sage. McCartney, G. (2008). Does one culture all think the same? An investigation of destination image perceptions from several origins. Tourism Review, 63 (4), 13-26. Plog, S. (1973). Why destination areas rise and fall in popularity. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 13 (3), 13-16. Plog, S. (1991). Leisure travel; making it a growth market.. again!. New York: Wiley and Sons. Reisinger, Y., & Mavondo, F. (2005). Travel anxiety and intention to travel internationally: Implication of travel risk perception. Journal of Travel Research, 43 (3), 212-245. Richardson, J. (2010). The certainty of uncertainty: Risk management revisited. Foresight, 12 (4), 47-64. Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, consumption, prosumption the nature of capitalism in the age of the digital ‘prosumer’. Journal of Consumer Culture, 10 (1), 13-36. Robbins, P., & Zacks, J. M. (2007). Attachment theory and cognitive science: Commentary on Fonagy and Target. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 55 (2), 457–67. Roehl, W., & Fesenmaier, D. (1992). Risk perceptions and pleasure travel: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Travel Research, 30 (4), 17-29. Schur, M. (1960). Discussion of Dr. Bowlby´s paper. In The psychoanalytic study of the child (pp. 63-84). New York: International University Press. Sennett, R. (2011). The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. New York: WW Norton & Company. Sjoberg, L. (1999). Risk perception by the public and by experts: A dilemma in risk management. Human Ecology Review, 6 (2), 1-9. Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risks. Science, New Series, 236, 280-285. Slovic, P., & Weber, E. (2002). Perception risk posed by extreme events. Conference on Risk Management Strategies in an Uncertain World. Palisades, New York. April 13-12. Spitz, R. (1960). Discussion of Dr. Bowlby Paper. In The psychoanalytic study of the child (pp. 85-94). New York: International University Press. Spitz, R. (1969). El primer año de/lida en el niño. México: FCE. Stern, D. (2000). El mundo interpersonal del infante: Una perspectiva desde el psicoanálisis y la psicología Evolutiva. Editorial Paidos: Buenos Aires. Suetonius, T. (1985). Los Doce Césares (The Twelf Caesars). Madrid: Editorial Sarpe. Vanhove, N. (2012). The economics of tourism destinations. London: Routledge. Vastfjall, D., Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (2008). Affect, risk perception and future optimismo alter tsunami disaster. Judgement and Decisión Making, 3 (1), 64-72. Wang, K. C., Jao, P. C., Chan, H. C., & Chung, C. H. (2010). Group package tour leader’s intrinsic risks. Annals of Tourism Research, 37 (1), 154-179. Waterton, C., & Wynne, B. (2001). Can focus groups assess community views? In R. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing Focus Group. Politics theory and practices (pp. 127-143). London: Sage. 68 Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 4 (1) Weng-Bin, C., Ming-Hsu, C., & Chien-Lung, C. (2009). The moderating role of personal relevance on differential priming of anxiety and sadness on perceived travel risk: A replication. Psychological Report, 104, 500-508. Winnicott, D. W. (1960). The theory of the parent-infant relationship. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 41 (6), 585-595. 69