Advancing a social justice-orientated agenda through research: a review of refugee-related research in tourism

Abstract

Scholars have called for more critical considerations of social justice and tourism that align with the tenets, values, and practices for sustainability, transformation, and social change. The aim of this research was to map and critically assess the status of refugee-related research in tourism, particularly with regards to the extent to which it adopts, or extends, a social justice-oriented agenda. A systematic literature review of existing studies was conducted. Content analysis assessed three aspects of 37 studies, namely, (1) the topics covered, (2) the extent to which the research aligns with social justice research practices, and (3) the extent to which the research furthers the social justice agenda for transformation. The review revealed a body of work that does not demonstrate social justice research practices; mostly because the refugee-related research topics of focus do not exhibit a social justice-oriented agenda. Our review illustrated that existing tourism research tends to frame refugees negatively and as a threat to destinations, and neglect critical considerations of epistemologies, reflexivity, and research processes. We conclude by highlighting alternative approaches that could contribute to a social justice-oriented agenda, using tourism as a bridge for creating change within structures, discourses, and practices in refugee-related research.

Keywords:

• Social justice-oriented agenda
• research
• refugees
• tourism
• systematic literature review

Introduction

Researchers have called for a more in-depth examination of justice as a key principle to guide sustainable tourism (Jamal & Camargo, 2014). Early sustainable tourism pioneers sought concepts of transformation, personal development, justice, fairness, and equity to be addressed. However, a neoliberal, economic discourse and industry focus continues to dominate perspectives (Jamal & Camargo, 2014). Thomas (2020), along with other scholars, has asked how tourism research could authentically align with social justice values and how researchers could work in a participatory, collaborative manner with external stakeholders for social change and to further the sustainable tourism agenda (Jamal & Camargo, 2014). For instance, when planning for research with and within communities to address social issues, reflexive spaces need to be created for dialogue where diverse ontologies, epistemologies, and experiences can be heard and actioned (Cockburn-Wootten et al., 2018; Rastegar & Ruhanen, 2023).

Refugees are one of the populations that tend to be cited as being marginalised and not having agency or a “voice” in academic research (Sigona, 2014). The refugee crisis is one of the most enduring global issues that earns substantial media, international, and scholarly attention. Since the end of the Second World War the world-wide number of refugees has steadily increased, reaching 27.1 million by the end of 2021 (UNHCR , 2022). Not surprisingly, tourism scholars have tried to understand, research, and examine the interdependence of refugee inflows and tourism (e.g. Cirer-Costa, 2017; Ivanov & Stavrinoudis, 2018). Despite the growing interest, we do not yet know the extent to which the growing body of refugee-related tourism research aligns with social justice aims. Moreover, a wider challenge for scholars has been to identify a framework to guide social justice research within tourism, as what constitutes “just tourism” remains ambiguous (Jamal & Higham, 2021). Whilst a social justice-orientated agenda through research needs to be more clearly articulated within tourism, we seek to contribute to the burgeoning work on social justice and tourism by addressing the following three questions:

1. What topics relating to refugees are covered in existing tourism research?

2. To what extent does this research align with social justice research practices?

3. To what extent does this research further the social justice agenda for transformation?

To address these questions, the aim of this research was to map and critically assess the status of refugee-related research in tourism. In a nascent topic like this, a review of previous research is critical to further reassert and expand ongoing considerations of social justice in refugee-related tourism research to help advance the social justice and tourism agenda.

Literature review

Social justice and tourism

Previous scholarship on “justice” has often described situations and experiences aiming to create awareness around amendments to society to minimise marginalisation, discrimination, and oppression (Parry et al., 2013). The nature of oppression, why individuals are oppressed, and how oppression is manifested in societal systems and structures have been a focus of previous studies (Grimwood, 2000; Jamal & Camargo, 2014; Jamal & Higham, 2021; Jones, 2016; Rawls, 1971; Stewart, 2014). A review of the literature shows that tourism scholars (e.g. Kalvelage et al., 2022; Schnegg & Kiaka, 2018) have often referred to justice as distributive justice and defined it as “…fair distribution of power, goods, and so on within and between societies” (Smith & Duffy, 2003, p. 92). This distributive perspective has been critiqued; it focuses on the equality of tourism outcomes for local communities but ignores the wider justice issues in tourism, such as social needs and welfare related to environmental constraints (Bramwell & Lane, 2008). Jamal (2019) has lamented that this approach to justice neglects diverse epistemologies and does not prioritise empowering people to address their specific needs. In addition, this approach does not address historical systematic and institutionalised injustices. Critical feminist and indigenous scholars have also criticised this narrow conceptualisation of justice, since it is largely rights-based, tends to neglect critiquing privileged knowledge, and positions people as victims of “their choices”, while continuing to mask the structural and historical equalities facing communities (Alarcón & Cole, 2019; bell hooks, 2000; Jamal & Camargo, 2014; Kalisch & Cole, 2022).

To reorient tourism away from the oppressive and exploitative injustices it currently enacts and supports (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2020), we need to advance our understanding beyond this narrow distributive definition and integrate social justice into sustainable tourism approaches (Jamal et al., 2013; Rastegar, 2020). “Social justice” places an emphasis on the social inequities and relational aspects in societies and accepts the proposition that “knowledge is both socially constructed and competing” (Holmes et al., 2005, p. 249). “Social justice” tackles issues such as poverty and privilege, and endeavours to work with and within communities to disrupt and advocate for radical change (Cockburn-Wootten et al., 2018; Higgins-Desbiolles, 2010; Hurst et al., 2021). The term “social” in social justice refers to the relational and emotional aspects within issues of social inequality and aims to identify and address the systemic factors that contribute to social injustices. Parry et al. (2013) provided a succinct synopsis of the concept when they described social justice as a “specific end state of social change that accounts for power differentials” (p. 82).

To achieve change, social justice scholarship has examined and challenged the ways in which social and economic structures produce and reproduce inequalities. It aims to identify and challenge these structures to promote greater fairness and social change (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2010). Trussell (2014) proposed that social justice research is about looking outward through the lens of a politics of hope and believing that empowerment and social change can occur through making that which was once invisible and excluded visible through our research and research practices. Working within this approach requires being attuned to aspects relating to the “social”, being sensitive to the relational and emotional aspects of social inequality, and aiming to “unravel how comfortable assumptions embedded in our individual tourism experiences are often welded to hegemonic social narratives, ideologies, and discourses” (Grimwood & Johnson, 2021, p. 28). A social justice orientation requires that we reflexively dig deeper into our positionality, embedded structures, discourses, and standpoints, in order to challenge ourselves and advocate for methodological approaches that allow diverse standpoints to be heard within relationships of care for collaboratively creating social change (Boluk & Panse, 2022; Fennell & Sheppard, 2021; Guia, 2021). Evaluation of a social justice-orientated agenda in academic research is, then, essential to ascertain the principles, contributions, and gaps of our work as critical scholars endeavouring to make a difference and further social change.

Towards a social justice-oriented agenda through tourism research

Sustainable tourism scholars, Jamal and Higham (2021) reinforced concerns about the extent, and theorisation of social justice in tourism. Previously, tourism scholars used dialogic theories and radical feminist theories to challenge traditional structures of working and research (Hollinshead, 2010; LaFever, 2011; Shelley et al., 2021; Staiff et al., 2013). Dialogic approaches that draw on Habermas’ theory of communicative action and Freire’s critical pedagogy have been used by tourism scholars, for instance, to enhance inclusive collaborative community stakeholder work in order to overcome knowledge silos, improve power imbalances, and disseminate research for social change (Cockburn-Wootten et al., 2018; Johansson, 2009; López-González, 2018; Spracklen, 2011). Similarly, Mtapuri and Giampiccoli’s (2020) work examined how structural change can happen if regulations and practices that favour an elite are removed. They called for collaborative, community participation with cooperative models of ownership. In other examples, Gilligan’s “ethic of care” theory has been posited as one approach that offers a reflexive examination of relational aspects and emotions. It has gained some traction with attempts towards decolonising knowledge and Eurocentric practices (Simola, 2003). Spiller et al. (2011) examined how the notion of care is central to indigenous Māori knowledge, relationships, and well-being, and how it was used to resist neoliberal approaches by Māori tourism operators. Similarly, Higgins-Desbiolles et al. (2022) discussed relationships of care that created more socially just practices within an events management context.

Reviewing previous social justice work in tourism can lead us to a clearer conceptualisation of a social justice-orientated agenda that provides a guide to direct attention to the theoretical and research process used to work with communities for impact and gain “a more socially just set of relations” (Stewart, 2014, p. 327). Our review of the literature revealed six key aspects that could loosely form a social justice-orientated agenda for research (as illustrated in column one in Table 1). The first key principle relates to epistemologies and being reflexive. This calls attention to considerations of the socially produced knowledge that constructs our realities and, in doing so, creates opportunities to challenge claims and assumptions related to theories and practices (Cunliffe, 2003). A reflexive stance to epistemologies identifies considerations for researchers and highlights questions concerning motivations and values, such as who is involved and why, along with whose knowledge, skills, voices, and needs are privileged or silenced.

Table 1. Towards a social justice-orientated agenda through research.

Key aspects	Description
Epistemologies and Reflexivity	Values, morals, and an ethic of care frame the research. Hearing and including the wisdom, experiences, and understandings from diverse participants. Ensuring that voices have the space and time to be heard. Revealing what has been left out, suppressed, misunderstood, and ignored. Critical reflecting and acknowledging motivations, assumptions, and researcher cultural competencies. Reflecting on the wider context, historical narratives, ideologies and structures that have shaped assumptions, knowledge and practices.
Structures, Impact and Social change	Working towards social force to re-distribute power, resources to challenge unequitable structures, institutions, ideologies, and discourses. Decolonizing methodologies. Moving beyond making academic discourse towards enacting social change. Potential benefits to the community and wider society should be the major priority of the researcher(s). Aiming to challenge and overturn oppressive and unequal practices, regulations, and societal attitudes. Restorative actions for an equitable and just future.
Research process	Collaborative decision making to identify research focus with communities to frame within the needs of the community. Involving participants in different phases of the research including data collection, analysis, and reporting. Including critical self-reflection on researcher teams’ power, biases, theoretical predispositions, and preferences. Using participatory approaches with a primary goal of social justice aims and creating spaces for dialogue using relevant methods such as, creative, visuals, song, poems, and narrative.
Relationships	Treating participants respectfully. Becoming culturally competent. Cultural experts and insiders to ensure culturally-appropriate and respectful research relationships and processes. Participants are co-researchers, collaborators for the research. Taking the time to develop a deep trusting relationship with participants. Creating research process that involves care, empathy, and compassion. Equitable partnerships, ownership and distributive justice.
Empowering	Participants are involved in leading and controlling aspects of the research. Participants to voice their stories, honouring their strengths, needs, and values. Making opportunities for mutual meaning-making process in research. Paying attention to the possible need to develop self-efficacy, education, and communication for the research team. Researchers critically reflect and are sensitive to their privilege. Recognising the rights of animals, ecology, and non-human entities. Developing capacities, education and skills.
Dissemination	Involves communities with the analysis and findings to raise awareness. Communicating and presenting the research in a form that will be useful to participants and communities. Selecting communication channels and languages that are inclusive and accessible, including those who are traditionally marginalised. Communication is delivered in a culturally appropriate and trustworthy channel/location. Making the results available to all community members. To allow diverse interpretations to be used within the research.

The second principle relates to social structures to examine issues of power in relationships and within historical or cultural contexts. As Stewart (2014) has argued, social justice is more than just one person having power over another, it also requires an examination of social and cultural contexts. Without recognising these contexts of power and inequality, it can be difficult to assess progress. The goal of this principle is to understand, make visible, and take action against systematic social inequities that privilege or marginalise particular groups of people in society, and work toward changing them (Aydarova, 2019; Fassinger & Morrow, 2013). This point is also relevant to the power structures within academia itself, notably, the neoliberal university structures that reward research practices that benefit only their academic institutions and individual researchers’ career promotions, rather than yielding wider social impact (Cockburn-Wootten et al., 2018; Thomas, 2022).

The third, fourth, and fifth principles relate to research processes, relationships, and empowerment. A key aspect for securing change has been to challenge traditional research processes to ensure that the research project itself has a wider meaningful purpose around social change intervention, in which researchers and participants collaborate (Fassinger & Morrow, 2013). This involves designing respectful and egalitarian research environments that support participants’ autonomy, dialogue, and promote agency over the research process (Boluk & Panse, 2022; Rastegar & Ruhanen, 2021). It may mean that planning for training and mentoring to develop self-efficacy, skills, and competencies for community members involved within the research team needs to be considered (Goodson & Phillimore, 2012). The research team members become, “advocates for causes and issues [who] helps articulate enduring and emergent problems and bring together key stakeholders for community discussions/actions” (Parry et al., 2013, p. 83). Participants’ agendas then become the central focus of the research, with the investigator serving as a facilitator and using dialogic and critical reflexive methods to privilege their inclusion, and hear the silences around the issue.

The final principle, dissemination, draws on the arguments put forward by feminist and community scholars who have called for greater consideration of methods for how we represent research knowledge, research findings, participants’ narratives, “as no single method can grasp the world in-flux” (Foster, 2007, p. 363). Creative, arts and narrative methodologies, for instance, draw on participatory and appreciative enquiry theories to resist the dominating epistemologies and structures, such as language, which can impose one truth over multiple interpretations of diverse experience (Kirsch, 1999). The benefit of these methodologies is that no one truth is privileged. This makes research findings more collaborative and accessible in communicating with communities.

Methodology

To contribute to burgeoning considerations of a social justice-oriented agenda through tourism research, the aim of this study was to map and critically assess the status of refugee-related research in tourism, particularly with regards to the extent to which it adopts, or extends, a social justice-oriented agenda. A systematic literature review process was used as it enables “a replicable, scientific, and transparent process” (Tranfield et al., 2003, p. 209). This method allows for the inclusion of “relevant literature … to (re)consider taken-for-granted or new concepts” (Hurst et al., 2021, p. 501) and a systematic identification of the existing knowledge for future considerations and directions (Linnenluecke et al., 2020). The method we employed followed five steps adapted from Pickering and Byrne (2014), namely: (1) defining the topic and formulating research questions; (2) identifying keywords, databases, and drafting literature selection criteria; (3) searching databases, screening search outcomes against the criteria, and refining exclusion and inclusion criteria; (4) structuring a summary table, appraising literature quality and relevance, and extracting relevant information; and, (5) content analysis and reporting findings.

To achieve the aim of this study, we used the search string "forced migra*" OR "illegal migra*" OR "forcibly displaced" OR "refugee*" OR "asylum seeker*" OR "boat people" OR "undocumented migra*" AND tourism in titles, keywords, and abstracts to search for relevant literature. We included different terms used to refer to refugees to capture a broad range of studies but also to distinguish refugees from migrants (Bloch, 2020). We focused on tourism as an independent academic field of research (Tribe, 2005; Xiao et al., 2013). We acknowledge that some tourism studies do not distinguish between refugees and migrants and include both in their research without acknowledging their differences (Hoque et al., 2022). Our study aimed to consider social justice perspectives regarding forced displacement that specifically determine the situation of refugees. Notably, refugees are distinguished from migrants by their forced mobility to seek safety, loss of access to return to their home country, protracted legal procedures in their host countries, and traumatic experiences (Abebe, 2020; Bakker et al., 2017; Hoque et al., 2022).

The search started with the Scopus database which has a large coverage of journals and tourism publications and is considered to be more comprehensive than other databases (Figueroa-Domecq et al., 2015). This was followed by searches of four additional electronic databases: EBSCO, Elsevier, ProQuest, and Emerald. The search was conducted in January 2023 and yielded a total of 680 results: 282 results from Scopus, 297 from EBSCO, 83 from ProQuest, 18 results from Elsevier, and no results from Emerald (see Figure 1). We limited the search to English texts, so 52 German, Arabic, Russian, Bosnian, Turkish, French, and Polish documents were excluded. We recognise this limitation, especially for advancing a social justice-orientated agenda through research, and note the geopolitics of knowledge arguing that intellectual conversation has been dominated by the English language (Mura & Wijesinghe, 2021). We equally note our own limitations as researchers in this sense and the need for us to consider how we can study social justice issues across languages without potential misinterpretation through translation (Kodom-Wiredu et al., 2022).

Figure 1. The systematic literature review process.

We further filtered our search results to include publications in journals as they play a key part in the creation of knowledge in a discipline and the ongoing scholarly debates on current issues (Acker et al., 2022) and entail uniformity of scholarly scrutiny and review for publication (Kodom-Wiredu et al., 2022). Consequently, once 250 books, book chapters, conference papers, letters, magazines, news, reports, editorials, and reviews were excluded, 378 documents remained. We acknowledge the power of gatekeepers in relation to publishing in journals. As a result, those whose values and beliefs do not always align with those of the gatekeepers may be excluded (Spender, 1981).

We then removed 156 duplicated items, leaving 222 studies. Next, the studies were screened and 72 reviews, bibliographies, news, commentaries, reports, parliamentary declarations, interviews, poems, and articles that did not contain at least one of the keywords from the search string in their title, abstract or keyword were excluded. After reading the full texts, 113 further studies were excluded because refugees and tourism were not the central focus of research, as determined by our research aim and three research questions. The excluded articles focused on broader or extraneous issues, for example, spread of disease, urban planning strategies, and international policies.

The final number of articles included in the synthesis was 37. We did not limit the search by journal rankings or any specific time period, allowing for a broad mapping of refugee-related research in tourism. Figure 1 summarises the systematic literature review process. To answer our three research questions a content analysis was performed by the authors and the findings presented below (Mura & Wijesinghe, 2021). As with any systematic review process, it has limitations. Most notably, we reflect on the broader colonial academic system that prioritises Western epistemologies in the production of knowledge, and our role in reproducing the existing power/knowledge frameworks that may thwart social justice research (Ateljevic et al., 2007). That said, we hope that analysing current research through a broader social justice lens may help further the discussions and prioritise an agenda for social justice-oriented research in tourism.

Findings and discussion

Table 2 summarises the 37 studies which were included in this research. As the table illustrates, 35 studies were published since Europe’s 2015 “refugee crisis”, an event that captured global attention, during which more than one million people (mainly from Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq) fled conflict and sought protection in Europe (Clayton, 2015). In the following sections, we will discuss the results of our systematic literature review to answer our research questions: (1) topics relating to refugees covered in existing tourism research, (2) the extent to which this research aligns with social justice research practices, and (3) the extent to which this research furthers the social justice agenda for transformation. Each finding is in turn discussed for its implications for our understanding and achievement of a social justice-oriented agenda through tourism research.

Table 2. The 37 studies included in the review.

Author	Year	Title	Journal
Chesney & Hazari	2003	Illegal migrants tourism and welfare: A trade theoretic approach	Pacific Economic Review
Kenny	2009	Landscapes of memory: Concentration camps and drought in Northeastern Brazil	Latin American Perspectives
Bakirci	2015	Sustainable development of rural tourism within the periphery of metropolitan areas: The Polonez Village (Istanbul, Turkey)	Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences
Katsanevakis	2015	Illegal immigration in the eastern Aegean Sea: A new source of Marine litter	Mediterranean Marine Science
Marschall,	2015	The role of tourism in the production of cultural memory: The case of “Homesick Tourism” in Poland	Memory Studies
Seitsonen, Herva, & Kunnari	2016	Abandoned refugee vehicles "In the Middle of Nowhere": Reflections on the global refugee crisis from the Northern Margins of Europe	Journal of Contemporary Archaeology
Simeli, Tsagaris, & Manitsaris	2016	Refugee Routes and Common Resource Pools in Tourism Areas: The Case of Lesvos Island, Greece	Tourismos: An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism
Pechlaner, Nordhorn, & Poppe	2016	Being a guest – perspectives of an extended hospitality approach	International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
Cirer-Costa	2017	Turbulence in Mediterranean tourism	Tourism management perspectives
Pappas & Papatheodorou	2017	Tourism and the refugee crisis in Greece: Perceptions and decision-making of accommodation providers	Tourism Management
Shaul	2017	On shipwrecks and sea nymphs: Fragments of Maltese hospitality	Hospitality & Society
Bloch	2018	Making a community embedded in mobility: Refugees, migrants, and tourists in Dharamshala (India)	Transfers
Cater, Low, & Keirle	2018	Reworking Student Understanding of Tourism Mobility: Experiences of Migration and Exchange on a Field Trip	Tourism Planning and Development
Géraud	2018	Hmong of French Guiana and Hmong of France: From family and roots tourism towards tourism experience of existential authenticity	International Journal of Tourism Anthropology
Ivanov & Stavrinoudis	2018	Impacts of the refugee crisis on the hotel industry: Evidence from four Greek islands	Tourism Management
Melotti, Ruspini, & Marra	2018	Migration, tourism and peace: Lampedusa as a social laboratory	Anatolia
Pappas	2018	Hotel decision-making during multiple crises: A chaordic perspective	Tourism Management
Alrawadieh, Karayilan, & Cetin	2019	Understanding the challenges of refugee entrepreneurship in tourism and hospitality	The Service Industries Journal
Lugosi & Allis	2019	Migrant entrepreneurship, value-creation practices and urban transformation in São Paulo, Brazil	Brazilian Journal of Tourism Research
Musarò & Moralli	2019	De-bordering narratives on tourism and migration. A participatory action-research on two innovative Italian practices	Italian Journal of Sociology of Education
Shneikat & Alrawadieh,	2019	Unraveling refugee entrepreneurship and its role in integration: empirical evidence from the hospitality industry	The Service Industries Journal
Tsokota, von Solms, & van Greunen	2019	The reticent effect of ICT on tourism: A case study of Zimbabwe	African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure
Zenker, von Wallpach, Braun, & Vallaster	2019	How the refugee crisis impacts the decision structure of tourists: A cross-country scenario study	Tourism Management
Akhmedov, Hunter, & Choi	2020	Q method finds anti-refugee sentiments on Yemeni migration to Jeju	Tourism Geographies
Dibeh, Fakih, & Marrouch	2020	Tourism–growth nexus under duress: Lebanon during the Syrian crisis	Tourism Economics
Hochberg	2020	From heritage to refugee heritage: Notes on temporality, memory, and space	Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East
Lagos et al.	2020	Narrating Hellas: tourism, news publicity and the refugee Crisis’s impact on Greece’s “Nation-Brand”	Journal of Tourism History
Tsartas et al.	2020	Refugees and tourism: a case study from the islands of Chios and Lesvos, Greece	Current Issues in Tourism
Krasteva	2017	Q method finds anti-refugee sentiments on Yemeni migration to Jeju	Tourism Geographies
Pimentel Biscaia, & Marques	2020	Dystopian dark tourism: affective experiences in Dismaland	Tourism Geographies
Alrawadieh, Altinay, Cetin, & Şimşek	2021	The interface between hospitality and tourism entrepreneurship, integration and well-being: A study of refugee entrepreneurs	International Journal of Hospitality Management
Cetin, Altinay, Alrawadieh, & Ali	2021	Entrepreneurial motives, entrepreneurial success and life satisfaction of refugees venturing in tourism and hospitality	International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management
Paraskevaidis & Andriotis,	2021	Medical volunteers as accidental tourists: humanitarianism and the European refugee crisis	Tourism Recreation Research
Shiran, Farsani, & Rajaie Rizi	2021	Isfahan as a destination for promoting historical nostalgia tourism with an emphasis on World War II memories	Journal of Heritage Tourism
Toomey	2021	The nexus of (im)mobilities: hyper, compelled, and forced mobile subjects	Mobilities
Burrai, Buda, & Stevenson,	2022	Tourism and refugee-crisis intersections: co-creating tour guide experiences in Leeds, England	Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Hoque, Faisal, & Shoeb-Ur-Rahman	2022	Destination repurposed: transformative impacts of refugee crisis	Tourism Recreation Research

Topics relating to refugees covered in existing tourism research

The first question addressed in our systematic literature review was: What topics relating to refugees are covered in existing tourism research? This question is important as it identifies developing patterns within tourism research and maps what has previously been done. Table 3 shows the frequency of topics extracted from the studies. Many of the studies included in our research (16 of the 37 studies) approached the topic of refugee displacement in the context of tourism. This topic was generally treated negatively and described the movement of refugees in the world as a “refugee crisis”. This focus on using the term “refugee crisis” was noted by Freedman, Kivilcim, and Baklacıoğlu (2017), as being first employed by Europe-led officials in an effort to highlight the difficulty of controlling the situation, and to justify extreme measures, such as closing national borders. Other scholars have also argued that the “crisis” labelling emphasises urgency for humanitarian relief, and deflects attention away from the factors that contribute to migration and related political failures (Farmaki & Christou, 2019). Of the 16 studies, 11 concluded that the “refugee crisis” posed a threat to tourism destinations (Akhmedov et al., 2022; Cirer-Costa, 2017; Ivanov & Stavrinoudis, 2018; Katsanevakis, 2015; Pappas, 2018; Pappas & Papatheodorou, 2017; Krasteva, 2017; Simeli et al., 2016; Tsartas et al., 2020; Tsokota et al., 2019; Zenker et al., 2019). These studies argued that the “refugee crisis” had an adverse effect on the image of a destination and subsequent growth of the tourism sector. According to these studies, tourists were welcome in the competitive tourism marketplace to drive the growth of the destination, while refugees were not welcome (Higgins-Desbiolles et al., 2019). Some of these studies provided recommendations for how to reduce the negative effects of the “refugee crisis” on a destination (e.g. Akhmedov et al., 2022; Pappas & Papatheodorou, 2017; Zenker et al., 2019). In contrast to these more negatively framed research studies, two studies concluded the “refugee crisis” affected the tourism destination in a positive way (Lagos et al., 2020; Melotti et al., 2018). According to these two studies, tourist flows were assisted by the custom of “philoxenia” (kindness to strangers) and the international prominence of destinations as places of peace. Two other studies concluded that the “refugee crisis” altered the business landscapes by the influx of aid workers and voluntary tourists to the tourism destination (Hoque et al., 2022; Paraskevaidis & Andriotis, 2021). The last study addressing this topic concluded that the “refugee crisis” had no effect on tourism (Dibeh et al., 2020).

Table 3. Summary of topics covered in the studies.

Topics	No. of studies
Effects of the “refugee crisis” on tourists and tourism destinations	16
Involvement of refugees in the tourism sector	7
Refugee heritage tourism	6
Mobility rights of refugees and tourists	4
Relationship between tourism, hospitality, and refugees	2
Diaspora tourism	2
Total	37

The next most frequently addressed topic (seven studies) was the involvement of refugees in the tourism sector. Four of these studies focused on how being involved in tourism - either by entrepreneurship or working in the sector - brought about positive social and economic outcomes for refugees in terms of providing them a platform for self-representation, autonomy, and empowerment (Alrawadieh et al., 2021; Burrai et al., 2022; Cetin et al., 2022; Shneikat & Alrawadieh, 2019). One of these studies discussed the challenges faced by refugee entrepreneurs in tourism and hospitality (Alrawadieh et al., 2019). Another study investigated how refugee entrepreneurs mobilise identities, histories, and culturally specific knowledge as resources in constructing experiential propositions (Chesney & Hazari, 2003). The last study investigated the impact of an increase to tourism via the inflow of illegal migrants and their wages (Chesney & Hazari, 2003).

Six studies in our listed sources focused on refugee heritage tourism. These studies considered tourists who were attracted to visit places and items related to refugees as a means to develop a politically charged form of “ethical empathy”, contributing to imagining a more hopeful future (Bakirci, 2015; Hochberg, 2020; Kenny, 2009; Pimentel Biscaia & Marques, 2020; Seitsonen et al., 2017; Shiran et al., 2021). Another four studies discussed the freedom of movement and the mobility rights of refugees, as well as tourists, outside racist, oppressive nation-state laws and policies (Bloch, 2018; Cater et al., 2018; Musaro & Moralli, 2019; Toomey, 2021). These studies criticised how settler colonial logics, racial hierarchies, and capitalist accumulation produce mobility today, stigmatising asylum seekers as invaders or victims, and tourists as bearers of economic benefits. They aimed at co-construction of alternative representations of migration and tourism acknowledging mobility as a common and routine aspect of daily life.

The relationship between tourism, hospitality, and refugee issues, was discussed in two studies (Pechlaner et al., 2016; Shaul, 2017). These studies argued that while hospitality is increasingly linked to tourism, it is important to examine the concept of hospitality in a broader framework that not only includes tourists, but also refugees. The studies advocate for choosing policies that involve hospitality toward refugees. The last topic in our review (two studies) focused on diaspora tourism in which former refugees visit their hometown or other destinations related to ancestral heritage to seek their roots and identity to discover a way of life lost during the diaspora (Géraud, 2018; Marschall, 2015).

Our review revealed that a notable gap exists in topics relating to the positive contributions that refugees could provide to the host country/destination. Despite research presenting refugee inflows as challenges to the economic, socio-demographic, and security of a country, some scholars in other disciplines have noted the opportunities and contributions that this movement could provide if changes were made by the host country. For instance, Farmaki and Christou (2019) have proffered that the “European refugee crisis” may yield opportunities, specifically in terms of employment and associated economic dividends arising from the potential skills of refugees if the appropriate management strategies, such as recognition of qualifications, access to employment opportunities, and language training were implemented. Additionally, refugees offer valuable contributions to the culture and diversity of tourism destinations (World Tourism Organisation, 2009). Burrai et al. (2022), for instance, concluded that refugees from ethnically diverse backgrounds had cultural knowledge and skills that could enhance the tourism sector, as they can share their unique stories and traditions with visitors. To advance refugee-related research in tourism, it is necessary for scholars to move beyond negative associations and crisis management, and instead, consider broader critical conceptions for radical changes to employment, social, and other relevant structures, rather than perpetuating the integration of refugees into existing systems. As such, our review of current research topics signals the need for a more pressing call for a social justice-oriented agenda in refugee-related tourism research.

Social justice research practices in refugee-related tourism research

The second question addressed in our systematic literature review was: To what extent does this research align with social justice research practices? Perhaps not surprising given the lack of focus of existing refugee-related research in tourism on topics of social justice, few of the studies we reviewed demonstrated social justice research practices. As mentioned in Table 1, one key aspect of a social justice-oriented agenda through research involves consideration of epistemologies and critical reflexive processes to acknowledge motivations, assumptions, and cultural competencies. Surprisingly, only one study in our review (Burrai et al., 2022), took this approach in their research. Epistemological and ontological aspects are important in research because they shape a range of research practices, including data collection, analysis, interpretation and representation of data, and ethical considerations (Saha et al., 2008). With most of the refugee-related tourism research seemingly failing to acknowledge the positionality and cultural competencies of the researcher, there is potential for the research to be influenced by the imposition of the researcher’s own values, beliefs, and cultural biases. This can potentially lead to the suppression, exclusion, or misunderstanding of other cultural perspectives and ways of knowing (Bernal & Saez-Santiago, 2006). Consequently, in order to promote a social justice-oriented agenda through research, tourism scholars need to engage in critical reflection to avoid biases and inaccuracies in their research practices and produce research that is more inclusive, relevant, and respectful of the communities being studied (Smith, 2012). As an example, Russell-Mundine (2012) used critical reflexivity to contribute to the decolonising and reframing of research with indigenous people.

In terms of the research process, none of the empirical studies (N = 22) in our review stated that they engaged participants in an equitable, empowering, and collaborative way during different phases of the research. Such engagement could have included identifying a research focus in a collaborative manner, methods to capture diverse experiences, interpretations and silenced knowledge, involvement in the interpretation of data, and decisions about dissemination to ensure that the findings of research are presented in a way that is understandable and relevant to participants’ needs and interests. This approach allows for more ethical and respectful research practices that prioritise the voices and needs of participants and can help to build trust and rapport between researchers and the communities they work with (Minkler, 2004). We deduced from analysis of the 22 empirical studies in our review that the researcher shaped the research and the participants appeared as passive respondents to the researcher’s questions in the data collection phase. To advance a social justice-oriented agenda through research, tourism scholars could collaborate with refugee participants as co-researchers for practices that co-create knowledge, thereby generating rich, diverse, and appropriate knowledge for community change. In a study with refugees, Evans (2012), for example, used participatory approaches to create a more collaborative and participatory research process with empowering outcomes for the refugee participants.

Indeed, including refugees, either as researchers on the research team or as participants, has the potential to create empowering relationships by facilitating opportunities for people (who are frequently the subject of negative ideologies, discourses, and narratives) to have a role in crafting their own stories and identities (Grimwood & Johnson, 2021). As Godin and Doná (2016, p. 61) state, this process allows participants to become narrating subjects who challenge portrayals of themselves “as passive, vulnerable, needy victims, or threatening outsiders”. Additionally, Oliveira (2019) cautions that it is crucial to achieve a “balance of stories” (p. 529). In our review, refugees as participants occurred in eight of the 22 empirical studies (Alrawadieh et al., 2019, 2021; Burrai et al., 2022; Cetin et al., 2022; Lugosi & Allis, 2019; Musaro & Moralli, 2019; Pechlaner et al., 2016; Shneikat & Alrawadieh, 2019). The remaining empirical studies focused on the experiences of local residents in tourism destinations, tourism policymakers, tourism business owners, and tourists. Despite continued calls to be inclusive (Biddulph & Scheyvens, 2018), most studies still favour other stakeholders rather than including refugees as participants in tourism research. As Grimwood and Johnson (2021) noted however, the inclusion of the marginalised group (refugees) as participants should not be viewed as a panacea, as without reflexivity, it can still endorse the “colonial underbelly of much academic research” while positioning the academic as hero and in effect endorsing colonial structures as objective and unproblematic (p. 13). As co-researchers, it is crucial that we critically and reflexively challenge our positionality within “colonial structures, systems, and stories where we can strive to subvert settler colonial power and make space for indigenous resurgence” (p. 27).

Another key aspect associated with a social justice-oriented agenda through research is consideration of research relationships, which includes treating participants in a culturally sensitive and respectful manner. This often involves time and being involved with communities in a variety of activities other than just collecting data. Only one of the empirical studies included in our review mentioned that an empathetic, caring relationship was formed between the researcher and participants (Burrai et al., 2022). The other studies gave no information on the time taken to develop trusting and caring relationships between participants and researchers. Knowledge for social change is built from the collective understanding and analysis of lived experiences of people who are deeply connected over time and relationships (Johnson & Parry, 2015). Thus, to move toward a social justice-oriented agenda through research, tourism scholars need to consider building trusting relationships with participants. By developing these relationships, scholars can better understand the perspectives, needs, and desires of participants and ensure that their research is more equitable, inclusive, and sensitive to their needs.

The findings of our review revealed a body of work that does not demonstrate social justice research practices. This is, to date, mostly due to the refugee-related research topics of focus that do not exhibit a social justice-oriented agenda. Equally, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of the publishing process, as researchers may have used practices that could not be reported in their studies. Academic journals have limitations and researchers must conform to established conventions of research reporting to be able to publish their work. As a result, researchers may need to present their research practices in a way that fits these conventions, even if it means simplifying or leaving out some of the complexities of their research (Goodson & Phillimore, 2012). That said, in order to advance a social justice-oriented agenda through research, tourism scholars need to reorient their research practices to empower participants for collaborative activism and work to change endemic issues. Failing to do so can result in biased and inaccurate research that perpetuates systemic inequalities and hinders efforts to promote a social justice-oriented agenda.

Furthering the social justice agenda in refugee-related tourism research for transformation

The third question for our systematic literature review was: To what extent does this research further the social justice agenda beyond the research for transformation? Our review of 37 studies revealed that only six studies included radical considerations and actions for achieving impact, transformation, and social change. A review of previous literature laments that enacting a social justice-orientated agenda through research needs to challenge social structures and beliefs that sustain the continuation of marginalisation, prejudice, and oppression. Four of the studies directly addressed the intersection of refugees and the tourism sector (Alrawadieh et al., 2019, 2021; Burrai et al., 2022; Cetin et al., 2022). These studies aimed to challenge and break down the dominant structures and systems within the tourism sector by advocating for policies to support and facilitate refugee activities within the tourism sector. The authors argued for a more inclusive and equitable approach to tourism that recognises and supports the agency and potential of refugees, rather than marginalising or exploiting them. That said, the lack of adoption of social justice research practices meant that processes and systems were not challenged or transformed as a result of their research.

Two other studies that argued for social change addressed hospitality and its intersection with the experiences of refugees and tourism (Pechlaner et al., 2016; Shaul, 2017). Both studies criticised neoliberal business-orientated hospitality practices for their exclusionary and exploitative approach to refugees. They emphasised the need for a more comprehensive, empathetic approach drawing on the cultural origins of the concept of hospitality to encourage the tourism sector to prioritise the emotional, psychological, and social needs of refugees. Pechlaner et al. (2016) emphasised that refugee and tourism organisations can learn from each other to create a more welcoming and inclusive society for refugees. Whilst the authors suggested that such an approach would require a significant shift in the structures and systems that govern hospitality and tourism, their work did not seek to engage a transformative agenda.

Of the empirical studies that recruited participants, only two studies mentioned the transformation and empowerment of participants and their communities as the result of their involvement in the research. In one of these studies, a group interview with participants provided an opportunity to share ideas, knowledge, and perspectives between different ethnic backgrounds (Burrai et al., 2022). In another study, participants were engaged in critical thinking and analysis about tourism and gained new knowledge and a deeper understanding of certain aspects of tourism (Cater et al., 2018). None of the 37 studies in our review provided information on the dissemination of research findings to the participants and the broader community. This finding potentially signals that the community may not receive any information or feedback about the research results or gain any benefits from participation. (Hugman et al., 2011). This issue has been at the heart of why, for many communities, academic researchers are seen as “epidemics” that exploit participants in very colonising ways (Cockburn-Wootten et al., 2018, p. 1487).

Trussell (2014) proposed that by understanding, highlighting, and researching for action on issues that have been silenced or ignored in mainstream discourses, researchers can challenge and change dominant narratives and power structures. Despite this, our analysis showed that most refugee-related research in our review (23 out of 37 studies) tended to replicate the established systems of power and knowledge through their research, instead of challenging them. Hence, there is much greater scope for tourism scholars to advance a social justice-oriented agenda through research on refugee-related issues by producing knowledge that illustrates the injustices, inequalities, and exclusions in society, and adopting a hopeful approach that acknowledges or attempts the potential for social transformation (Ateljevic et al., 2007).

However, it is important to recognise that production of knowledge in the field of tourism is not an isolated process; it is influenced by global capitalist structures and power inequalities. Gatekeepers in the academic community establish standards and control the production and distribution of knowledge, and decree the innovations in thought, knowledge, and values (Spender, 1981). English-speaking nations, such as the USA, UK, Canada, and Australia dominate the current tourism affiliations and publications which play a significant role in shaping tourism knowledge. Therefore, scholars from underrepresented groups find it difficult to challenge publishing agendas or influence the discourses of tourism research and knowledge creation (Pritchard & Morgan, 2007). Government and institutional funding bodies are also hesitant to support research and projects that are deemed unconventional or less economically viable, and as a result, tend to favour safer, less controversial options (Hall, 2004). These structural factors limit the potential for a social justice-oriented agenda for transformational tourism research that challenges the dominant discourses toward enacting social changes, demonstrated here, notably, with respect to refugee-related issues in tourism.

Conclusion

This paper presents a systematic review of the status of refugee-related research in tourism to understand how refugees are represented in tourism research, and the extent to which a social justice-oriented agenda is observed within that body of research. Our review revealed that existing refugee-related research in tourism tended not to adopt a social justice aim and was dominated by attempts to understand the effect of refugee displacement on tourism destinations and perpetuate negative connotations of refugees and the “refugee crisis”. We found that most of these studies appeared not to adopt social justice-oriented research practices. Instead, the studies in our review appeared to mainly reproduce existing knowledge, which tends to prevent social or personal transformation by reinforcing dominant narratives and marginalising alternative perspectives.

The process of challenging established discourses and generating diverse research knowledge is frequently impeded by institutional and systemic obstacles, such as funding structures, hiring practices, and publication norms. Despite the challenges, creating change from within the field is necessary to develop alternative discourses and practices. Ren et al. (2010) suggest that collaboration and networks are crucial in gaining credibility for creating change within tourism academia. The composition of academia’s gatekeepers is also increasingly embracing diverse ways of knowing and paradigmatic shifts, allowing, for example, the emergence of younger, newer, and more diverse scholars to have a more prominent role in academic discourse and decision-making (Jamal & Kim, 2005). Only through these efforts can we ensure that tourism research is inclusive, diverse, and socially responsible, and that it increasingly contributes to social justice and a broader agenda for sustainable tourism.

Applying a social justice-oriented agenda to tourism research is not an end in itself, but a bridge for tourism to expand its role in societies and the global community. According to Higgins-Desbiolles (2006), tourism is a powerful social force that can achieve many important ends when its capacities are unfettered from market fundamentalism and, instead, are harnessed to meet human development imperatives and the wider public good. Tourism can play an important role in welcoming refugees into the host society, for example, through employment in tourism; this can serve as a powerful social force for cross-cultural dialogue and understanding. Tourism encounters bring former refugees into contact with both tourists and host country residents. By encouraging cross-cultural communication that fosters feelings of respect and interdependency, tourism has been credited with facilitating the healing of rifts in divided societies (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2006). We look forward to further tourism research that could contribute to a social justice-oriented agenda, using tourism as a bridge for creating change within structures, discourses, and practices in refugee-related research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.