Beyond destination accessibility: tourism infrastructure across mobilities, technologies and embodiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This introductory article to the Special Issue explores the evolving conceptualisation of tourism infrastructure through the lenses of assemblage thinking and the mobilities paradigm. Moving beyond traditional dichotomies of material versus immaterial infrastructure, it embraces a multidimensional, relational and dynamic understanding of infrastructure as an active agent in shaping tourism destinations, mobilities and socio-spatial inequalities. Drawing on interdisciplinary perspectives from critical geography and mobilities studies, the paper situates tourism infrastructure within the broader infrastructures of everyday life, emphasising its entanglement with bodies, affects, policies and power relations. The Special Issue’s contributions expand on this framework through diverse case studies across Sweden, Canada, France, Spain and Italy, highlighting how infrastructures are co-constituted through tourist, residential and labor mobilities, and how they mediate access, inclusion and transformation at multiple scales. In doing so, the Issue introduces new methodological and conceptual tools – such as “transpitality”, “sensing transit” and the infrastructural backstage – to rethink accessibility, sustainability and territoriality in tourism. It ultimately calls for an “infrastructural turn” in tourism studies that critically engages with the fluid, politicised and experiential nature of tourism mobilities infrastructures in an era marked by crises, socio-spatial inequality and planetary change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".