Reflecting on Action Research Practice in Tourism
Chrys M. I. Horn
Abstract
Chrys M. I. Horn
Abstract
Action research methodology is an important addition to current more mainstream social science methods. It provides a means for researchers to move beyond critique and contribute to positive actions in the future. It also provides a means to change our own practice so as to reflect changes in theoretical understandings of practice issues. This paper reflects on action research and the issues and problems that I, an action research practitioner, continue to grapple with. It is written in the hope of sparking further understanding of and interest in the methodology and its uses. As such, it represents a form of 'action research into the practice of action research' and highlights the reflexive nature of the methodology. My theoretical perspective is based in ideas about complex adaptive systems, and particularly in the school of thought known as critical systems theory (Barton et al. 2004). Systems theory suggests that to intentionally change a system takes time, and recognition that our knowledge of the system will always be incomplete. It predicts that unintended and unexpected changes will occur when one intervenes in a complex system, even with the best information and intentions. Systems are dynamic entities that change constantly, so our current strategies may not work so well in five or ten years time. This means that there are seldom 'magic bullets' for 'fixing' a system, particularly over the long term. Indeed, 'magic bullets' that cure one problem may well lead to unintended consequences in other parts to the system. To work within such systems, we must focus on learning how to learn, and must assume that 'knowledge' in these systems is contingent, temporary and incomplete (Barton et al 2004). In my experience, such a theoretical position leads one to an action research approach. I also believe that both theory and method have particular relevance in tourism which has itself been defined as a system (Leiper 1990; Simmons and Leiper 1998) which interacts with community, regional and national systems in many different ways (Horn 2002).
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Action research methodology is an important addition to current more mainstream social science methods. It provides a means for researchers to move beyond critique and contribute to positive actions in the future. It also provides a means to change our own practice so as to reflect changes in theoretical understandings of practice issues. This paper reflects on action research and the issues and problems that I, an action research practitioner, continue to grapple with. It is written in the hope of sparking further understanding of and interest in the methodology and its uses. As such, it represents a form of 'action research into the practice of action research' and highlights the reflexive nature of the methodology. My theoretical perspective is based in ideas about complex adaptive systems, and particularly in the school of thought known as critical systems theory (Barton et al. 2004). Systems theory suggests that to intentionally change a system takes time, and recognition that our knowledge of the system will always be incomplete. It predicts that unintended and unexpected changes will occur when one intervenes in a complex system, even with the best information and intentions. Systems are dynamic entities that change constantly, so our current strategies may not work so well in five or ten years time. This means that there are seldom 'magic bullets' for 'fixing' a system, particularly over the long term. Indeed, 'magic bullets' that cure one problem may well lead to unintended consequences in other parts to the system. To work within such systems, we must focus on learning how to learn, and must assume that 'knowledge' in these systems is contingent, temporary and incomplete (Barton et al 2004). In my experience, such a theoretical position leads one to an action research approach. I also believe that both theory and method have particular relevance in tourism which has itself been defined as a system (Leiper 1990; Simmons and Leiper 1998) which interacts with community, regional and national systems in many different ways (Horn 2002).
Key concepts: Reflexivity, Unintended consequences, Action (physics), Epistemology, Mainstream, Action research, Sociology, Engineering ethics