Navigation – Plan du site

The invention of the tourist destination

Rémy Knafou
Traduction de Université Bretagne Occidentale
Cet article est une traduction de :
L’invention du lieu touristique [fr]
Autre(s) traduction(s) de cet article :
Inventar el sitio turistico [es]


This paper first analyses the development of the invention of the tourist destination from a dual perspective, namely research on tourist resorts in the Alps and the evolution of ideas related to the study of tourism during the 1970s and 1980s. It then goes on to discuss the difficulties in identifying the reception of this concept. Finally, it examines the relationship between the invention of tourism and the concept of “moment in place”.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1Giving an account of the creation of a new idea in the humanities and social sciences involves first of all trying to restore the truth of the influences and intellectual associations that made it possible, i.e., this complex mix of encounters and readings. In other words, it involves acknowledging at least in part the work of others in one’s own work.

2Moreover, it is still not very common for an author to own the conditions of his/her production. This is especially true where an approach considered as scientific is concerned; an approach that goes beyond mere testimony as collected by a third party, in particular another scientist, whose role is then to submit these elements for in-depth and critical examination placed in perspective with other data and analyses in his/her possession. This is certainly one of the weaknesses of the approach that I have adopted in writing this paper, without the awareness that I have alleviated the difficulty or made my contribution any more credible for all that. Consequently, based on the elements provided in this paper, the work of critical analysis will remain to be done. (By critical analysis, I mean an approach that is both informed and anxious to provide elements of explanation and perspective; not, as it can sometimes be, a settlement of scores that contributes to discredit its author and – and this is much more serious – the humanities and social sciences.)

I. The development of the concept

  • 1 The “invention” in question consisted in a new use of an existing place, resulting from a new inter (...)
  • 2 Knafou R., Les stations intégrées de sports d’hiver des Alpes françaises. L’aménagement de la monta (...)

3The invention of the tourist destination1 needs to be situated in both the spirit and the place of the times, in other words, in the scientific context of the Alps of the 1970s and 1980s. My doctoral thesis,2 defended in March 1978 but which I had worked on from 1971 to 1977, had led me to examine the production of a new type of tourist destination through the specific case of “integrated” resorts, that is, resorts designed, created and managed by a single actor. These resorts had the common originality of having been established at high altitude, in mountain pastures, and not as a continuity of the permanent rural habitat of the region. The question of the insertion in the host societies of these foreign bodies – designed by often Parisian consultancy firms at the request of promoters who were also almost all Parisian – was therefore necessarily at the heart of my analysis. When choosing the topic of my thesis, in the summer of 1971, these resorts were still in the first phase of their creation process. At that time, La Plagne had but one resort (Aime-La Plagne), Les Arcs was also operating with only its first resort (Arc 1600), Avoriaz had not yet built its most massive buildings, Isola 2000 was on the point of being inaugurated, and neither Les Karellis nor Valmorel existed.

  • 3 A book reported this experience: L’Institut de Saint-Gervais. Recherche-action dans la montagne tou (...)

4Moreover, researchers had not yet fully grasped what was being played out in these new creations, ex nihilo. This was especially true of the geographers in Grenoble who, under the leadership of husband and wife Paul and Germaine Veyret, seemed reluctant to consider a tourism creation process common to different places. Indeed, the emphasis at the time focused on regional research, which notably afforded the advantage of establishing a grid of the Alps and a distribution of the baronies to the young researchers of the Institut de Géographie Alpine (Institute of Alpine Geography) of the University of Grenoble (Valais, Aosta Valley, Tyrol, etc.). Between the completion of my thesis and my recruitment in 1988 by the CNRS, the French National Centre for Scientific Research, I had spent ten years teaching outside of a university context (in preparatory classes for Grandes Écoles), during which time I had had no connection with the research field. In 1988, the CNRS thus recruited a Research Director who had the distinction of not having undertaken any research for almost ten years, and of whom, moreover, the Management of the Centre expected only supervision of the research of others. In order to reconnect with the Alps while managing a large Parisian laboratory of the CNRS and, at the same time, launching the “Festival International de Géographie” (International Festival of Geography) in Saint-Dié in the Vosges, I took the initiative of creating the “Institut de Saint-Gervais” (Saint-Gervais Institute). Designed as an action research tool in a tourist mountain area that had experienced a succession of winters without snow (1988, 1989 and 1990), the Institute’s role was to question and challenge models and certainties.3 The choice to locate this laboratory in Saint-Gervais-les-Bains (which was already aspiring to be known as “Saint-Gervais Mont-Blanc” in its tourism communication campaigns) was deliberate. Indeed, it was the complete opposite of the types of places on which my doctoral thesis had focused: a low-altitude resort, one of the oldest in existence, with tourism in long direct contact with the local society. During the prolonged interruption of my research activities, the scientific landscape within the Institut de Géographie Alpine had changed significantly. The premature death of Germaine Veyret-Verner in 1973, combined with the decision by Paul Veyret to step down from the management of the I.G.A. that same year, had favoured the arrival of another generation of teacher-researchers open to and actively embracing new approaches. These notably included the research topics of snow with H. Gumuchian and development with Jean-Paul Guerin, these two authors having in common an interest in the then growing topic of representations. Between these two generations of alpine geographers, Jacky Herbin and Robert Vivian were among those members of the I.G.A. with whom it was possible to work on research programmes on tourist resorts in the Alps in a very efficient and pleasant manner.

  • 4 This resulted in a partial publication entitled Chamonix-Mont-Blanc : les coulisses de l’aménagemen (...)

5This allowed me to immerse myself in the evolution of the relationship of geographers to mountains and to further the knowledge of the historical conditions of tourism development. In 1988, two titles also fuelled my thinking. These were the book by historian Alain Corbin, published by Aubier, and later translated under the title The Lure of the Sea: Discovery of the Seaside 1750-1840, and the thesis by Bernard Debarbieux, Territoires de haute montagne : recherches sur le processus de territorialisation et dappropriation sociale de lespace de haute montagne dans les Alpes du Nord (“High Mountain Territories: Research on the Process of Territorialization and Social Appropriation of High Mountain Areas in the Northern Alps”).4 It should be noted that the emerging interest of French geographers for the notion of territory dates back to the 1980s, the term being previously only used in ecology and political science. Moreover, the reflection on the processes of appropriation related to the use of this term was in large part due to geographers from the south-east of France, notably Jean-Paul Ferrier (Aix-en-Provence) and from Switzerland (Geneva) with Claude Raffestin (Raffestin, 1987).

6When I wrote the paper we are discussing here (Knafou, 1991), I regret to admit that I had not as yet read two works that would go on to play an important role in the reflection that led to the Institut de Saint-Gervais project. These were Michel Chadefaud’s very interesting thesis, Aux origines du tourisme dans les pays de l’Adour (“Origins of Tourism in the Pays de l’Adour”, 1987), which would convince me of the importance of historical processes in the understanding of the production of tourist destinations, and L’Invention du Mont Blanc (“Invention of the Mont Blanc”) by historian Philippe Joutard, published in 1986, but which I had only become aware of through the thesis by B. Debarbieux (1988). In my opinion, Joutard’s book had two merits. On the one hand, it provided confirmation of the convincing nature of the differentiation between discovery and invention, in the exciting backdrop of the growing interest for the “sublime mountains”. On the other, it referred, albeit discreetly, to the work by geographer Numa Broc, the very existence of which I was unaware of at the time.

7In the light of this short historical reminder, we can understand what was meant by “the place of the times” during the 1980s. Indeed, I found myself at the intersection between research topics (the mountain, and mainly the Alps; a renewal of the approach of historical conditions in the study of the processes of the production of new destinations; the sudden emergence of the notion of territory and the related processes of territorialization, deterritorialization and reterritorialization) and the places of the research underway on these topics (Geneva and Grenoble, mainly, but also Aix-en-Provence, Avignon and Besançon). And as luck or coincidence – not necessarily either one! – would have it, the Institut de Saint-Gervais, conceived in 1989 and created in 1990, found itself in a barycentric position in this “place of the times” – in the right place at the right time, so to speak…

  • 5 Its first and only publication was L’annuaire de la recherche géographique francophone (“Directory (...)
  • 6 MIT: this acronym was adjusted over the years, from “Mobilities, Itineraries, Territories” at the b (...)

8To conclude on the scientific context that led to “the invention of the tourist destination”, it is important, finally, to mention those who along with me made up the Institut de Saint-Gervais. Besides the Grenoblois (M. Chevallier, B. Debarbieux, F. Gerbaux, J.-P. Guérin, J. Herbin, E. Matteudi, A. Olivier and J. Tuppen) and the Saint-Gervolans involved in the project, three Parisian colleagues took up temporary home in the Alps. These were Florence Deprest and Philippe Duhamel, then students on a four-year university degree (in Saint-Gervais), and Mireille Bruston, sociologist with the CNRS and who, due to an exceptionally high level of requirements, played a decisive role in the whole intellectual adventure born in the Intergéo laboratory (Paris) with, in particular, the creation of the ephemeral “Observatoire de la Géographie et des Géographes” (Observatory of Geography and Geographers)5. The creation of the team of the MIT6 at Paris Diderot University in 1993 was the end result of this process.

9After mentioning all those to whom, in one way or another, I owe something for this paper in the Revue de géographie alpine, I believe it is useful to summarize the timeline concerning a period of professional activity that was very creative, from both an organizational and a scientific point of view. Indeed, while this paper was published in 1991, it was actually written in 1990, the year in which I successively created the Festival International de Géographie in Saint-Dié-des-Vosges (first held in June 1990), the Observatoire de la Géographie et des Géographes, and the Institut de Saint-Gervais, mentioned previously. Another particularity of this paper is that it was one of the last that was individually written, the majority of subsequent publications being collective works, mainly within the MIT team, with a first seminal paper (MIT Team, 1997), followed by the successive publication of three books on various aspects of tourism, Tourismes 1. Lieux communs (“Common Places”, 2002), Tourismes 2. Moments de lieux (“Moments in Places”, 2005) and Tourismes 3. La révolution durable (“The Sustainable Revolution”, 2012), published by Belin.

II. The way in which the author’s theoretical contribution was received by researchers in tourism or more broadly in the social sciences 

  • 7 This is a commonplace observation, and one that I had the opportunity of making on several occasion (...)
  • 8 The paper by Jean-Claude Vernex, entitled “L’invention des lieux touristiques” (“The Invention of T (...)

10In general, how the paper was received is not easy to assess, for at least three very different reasons. The first and most important reason concerns the rapid dilution of a contribution in the vast corpus of knowledge and analysis that was growing at an exponential rate, as well as the confusion between the dissemination and infusion of something new. This was all the more true since, with the exception of rather limited cases, we are only too aware that innovation in the human sciences, generally of the order of the relative and not of the absolute, and assuming a well-identifiable before and after, suffers from the impression of being something that is already known.7 It is also a fact that researchers sometimes cite certain authors and certain works without really having read them, mainly because the latter have become key figures or references in a given scientific field, which tends to relativize the value of automatic counts. A third reason is that one of the offences some researchers in the humanities and social sciences commit – consciously or not, that is another question – is to omit mentioning all of one’s sources of inspiration8 or, sometimes, to mention only secondary sources. This is true despite the fact that, as a matter of principle, one of the characteristics of scientific knowledge is that it is generally based on cumulative knowledge, which therefore requires clearly stating the grounds on which new contributions are made. However, this process can be mitigated by evoking the strength of the spirit of the time combined with the growing number of publications, ultimately responsible for the loss of the thread allowing for tracing the upstream influences of a publication. Thus, just as I had access to the work of P. Joutard (1986) at first only through B. Debarbieux’s thesis (1988), many researchers find it rather difficult to reconstruct the genealogy of an idea, even when sticking only to literature in their mother tongue. Normally, this difficulty should be countered by the critical review organized by journals before accepting a publication. Thus, in the case that I am presenting, it is obvious that it was up to the evaluators who reviewed my paper and accepted it for publication to point out the absence of reference to the work of P. Joutard. The same could be said for the evaluators of the Revue genevoise de géographie.

11Another reason for the difficulty in assessing the reception of my paper is specific to the nature of my scientific production. Indeed, as already pointed out, this paper was one of the last that I published as a lone researcher, with the exception of some that comprised more geographically marginal content (on Vermeer or beach scenes in the Dutch paintings of the Golden Age) and other works intended to review existing knowledge (such as the book Les Alpes in the “Que sais-je ?” collection). My personal production very quickly merged into a rather exceptional collective production in the field of the humanities and social sciences, since the works published by the MIT team no longer mentioned in the title page the authors’ names, but rather only that of the team. As a result, my contributions to this collection of works became unidentifiable (with the exception of the concept of “moment in place”, see below), creating an amalgam that is difficult to define for third parties. Indeed, some consider that R. Knafou disappeared within the MIT team, while the team was seen by others as something of a sock puppet for R. Knafou. The reality is that although I took the initiative of the creation of this team and managed it throughout its existence between 1993 and 2008, I was but one member among others. Moreover, the competence of my colleagues was more than sufficient for everyone to feel that they had a legitimate role within the team and made a consistent contribution duly appreciated by the others. Whatever the case, it was mainly through our collective productions that my contributions became known, but at the price of making this or that analysis less easily identifiable.

  • 9 Boyer M., L’invention du tourisme, Collection Découvertes, Paris, Éditions Gallimard, 1996, 160 p.

12What is certain is that the notion of the invention of destinations spread, both in the field of tourism and beyond. The paper by J. Rieucau, “Invention et création de lieux touristiques dans la dynamique de la diffusion urbaine littorale, au nord de la Costa del Azahar” (“The Invention and Creation of Tourist Destinations in the Dynamics of Coastal Urban Spread, North of the Costa del Azahar”), published in Cahiers de géographie du Québec (Rieucau, 2002) made no reference to my article published in the R.G.A., but rather to my contribution to the Encyclopédie de géographie. Published in 1992 by Economica, this Encyclopaedia contained my work on “The Invention of Tourism”,9 which largely reproduced the content of the paper in question while adding certain supplements, in particular the reference to P. Joutard. Outside of the field of tourism, the notion of the invention of destinations or spaces spread widely through a large number of works, but which were not originally published by geographers. Indeed, H. Le Bras and E. Todd inaugurated the series in French from 1981 with the stimulating book devoted to L’Invention de la France (“The Invention of France”), which they followed with L’Invention de l’Europe (“The Invention of Europe”) in 1990. Since then, geographers have also taken up the theme, with, among their many contributions, that of C. Grataloup, L’Invention des continents (“The Invention of Continents”, 2009).

  • 10 With the exception, perhaps, of P. Duhamel who, in his thesis Les résidents étrangers européens à M (...)

13Finally, to conclude this second point, a few explanations are necessary on the actual content of the paper. Besides the differentiation between invention and discovery with respect to tourist destinations, it contained an analysis of “the two powers of tourism”: “A diversion from the traditional use of the territory, the meaning of which thus also changes”, and “the incorporation in the place in question of new territories, previously ignored or very little used, and therefore very little integrated into the daily life and the scope of the local population: the beach for seaside towns, or high mountain areas.” This analysis has since been widely discussed, both in works in which I participated and in others by third parties. On the other hand, another part of this article, which was based on the historical and anthropological hypothesis of an “initial contract concluded between the host society and the tourist society, at the moment of the emergence of a new territory that represents both a trace and a testimony of the contract in question” did not, it would seem, inspire French researchers,10 despite the fact that nearly three decades later this avenue of research still continues to convey a heuristic dimension, in my opinion. To the credit of other researchers, I must say that I myself did not have the opportunity to further this initial analysis born from the study of several regions. As a result, my conclusion remained without effect:

In any invention of a tourist destination, there therefore exists a tacit contract concluded between the local society and the global society, and which expresses the difference between the impression of the same place on the part of its inhabitants and those who reveal its new nature, as well as, at the same time, the unequal capacity of the local population to bridge the gap in question. This contract is therefore a function of both the structures of the societies in contact and the forces of change, active or potential. This is the hypothesis that is formulated here, and which aims to help explain the different dynamics that, from one destination to another, a better knowledge of tourism gradually reveals in their complexity.” (Knafou, 1991, p. 19).

III. The modifications that the researcher himself made, over time, to his initial theoretical contribution: from the invention of the tourist destination to the moment in place

  • 11 The tourist site, the tourist “post”, the tourist resort and the tourist city, the last two being f (...)

14I have discussed the analysis of the invention of the tourist destination in several publications intended for a wider dissemination of work on tourism (Knafou, 1992, 2003a, 2003b, 2006), generally linking it to one of its logical sequences, a typology of tourist destinations, developed within the framework of the MIT team and honed through my discussions with Mathis Stock.11 

15But it is impossible to evoke this invention of tourist destinations without referring to the concept of “moment in place” which, in my opinion, is undoubtedly the result of a personal reflection developed in parallel with my participation in the MIT team.

16This concept was formulated in 2005, in the collective work of the MIT Team, Tourismes 2. Moments de lieux, where I gave the following definition: 

A place and a moment that embody a situation of general importance, exceeding the scope of the place itself”. Or again, “the more or less precise duration during which a given place (but also an area or a network of places) embodies a situation of general importance exceeding the scope of the place itself. This is thus the moment when the place, due to the invention or the consolidation of a practice or, more generally, of a social innovation with an affirmed spatial dimension, became a reference or even a model for other places”.

17This concept has allowed for highlighting the role of certain tourist destinations in the crystallization and incarnation of new practices corresponding to certain successive major inventions that have constituted the “tourist revolution”. Indeed, over time, the history of tourism can be summed up in a succession of inventions of practices, in differentiated places. These have included therapeutic bathing in cold waters (the English Channel and the North Sea, from the end of the 17th century); winter holidays in the Mediterranean (from the 18th century), contemporary with the discovery of the attractions of the mountain during summer; winter holidays in the mountains from the last quarter of the 19th century; and bathing in warm waters (Hawaii, followed by the Mediterranean) from the 20th century.

18This concept, which explored a blind spot in geographical and historical reflection, was created to try to understand the conditions of emergence and dissemination of new tourist practices; in other words, practices whose very identification depends on their location. It was a question of combining, at a given moment, an innovation consisting of practices and therefore actors and a place having certain qualities. The moment in place is therefore both a concept that makes it possible to summarize notions that hitherto have remained scattered and not been articulated, and a tool that enables the development of tourism to be reconstructed, thereby constituting a favourable field for its development.

19Designed to answer questions raised by the study of tourism, I put forward the hypothesis that the moment in place becomes operational in order to account for social practices in general when, by definition, they develop in places that allow for them and give them meaning.

Haut de page


Chadefaud M., 1987, Aux origines du tourisme dans les pays de l’Adour : du mythe à l’espace, un essai de géographie historique, Thèse d’Etat en géographie, Université de Bordeaux, coll. Cahiers de l’Université - Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, 1010p.

Corbin A., 1988, Le territoire du vide, l’Occident et le désir de rivage 1750-1840, Paris, Aubier, 412 p.

Debarbieux B., 1988, Territoires de haute montagne : recherches sur le processus de territorialisation et d’appropriation sociale de l’espace de haute montagne dans les Alpes du Nord, Thèse de doctorat en géographie, Université de Grenoble.

Equipe MIT, 1997, « Une approche géographique du tourisme », L’Espace géographique, n°3, 193-204.

Equipe MIT, 2002, Tourismes 1. Lieux communs, Belin, coll. Mappemonde, Paris, 320 p.

Equipe MIT, 2005, Tourismes 2. Moments de lieux, Belin, coll. Mappemonde, Paris, 348 p.

Equipe MIT, 2012, Tourismes 3. La révolution durable, Belin, Paris, 332 p.

Christian Grataloup, L’invention des continents : comment l’Europe a découpé le monde, Paris, Larousse, 2009, 224 p.

Joutard P., 1986, L’invention du Mont Blanc,Paris, Gallimard, 284 p.

Knafou R., 1978, Les stations intégrées de sports d’hiver des Alpes françaises. L’aménagement de la montagne « à la française », Thèse de doctorat en géographie, Paris, New York, Barcelone, Masson, 319 p.

Knafou R., 1991, « L’invention du lieu touristique : la passation d’un contrat et le surgissement simultané d’un nouveau territoire », Revue de géographie alpine, tome 79, n°4, 11-19.

Knafou R., 1992, Encyclopédie de géographie,Economica, « L’invention du tourisme », in Bailly A., Ferras R. et Pumain D. (dir.), Encyclopédie de géographie, Paris, Economica, avec le concours de Saint-Dié-des-Vosges, 851-864.

Knafou R., 1994, Les Alpes, coll. Que sais-je ?, PUF, 127 p.

Knafou R., Stock M., 2003a,« Epistémologie de la géographie », In J. Lévy et M. Lussault (dir.), Dictionnaire de la géographie et de l’espace des sociétés, Paris, Belin, 92-102.

Knafou R., 2003b, "Tourisme", In Mesure S., Savidan P. (dir.), Dictionnaire des sciences humaines, P.U.F.

Knafou R., 2006 et 2018, "Le tourisme", In A. Ciattoni et Y.Veyret (dir.), Les fondamentaux de la géographie, A. Colin.

Knafou R., 2007, "Tourisme et environnement", in Y. Veyret (dir.), dictionnaire de l’environnement, A. Colin.

Le Bras H., Todd E., 1981, L’invention de la France. Atlas anthropologique et politique, Paris, Hachette, 517 p.

Le Bras H., Todd E., 1990, L’invention de l’Europe, Paris, Le Seuil, coll. « Points essais ».

Raffestin C., 1987,« Repères pour une théorie de la territorialité humaine », Cahier/ Groupe Réseaux, vol. 3, n° 7, 2-22.

Rieucau J., 2002, « Invention et création de lieux touristiques dans la dynamique de la diffusion urbaine littorale, au nord de la CostadelAzahar », Cahiers de géographie du Québec, vol. 46, n°127, 25-48.

Haut de page


1 The “invention” in question consisted in a new use of an existing place, resulting from a new interpretation of the territory, and which led to both the subversion and the expansion of the place concerned. It was also at the origin of a tacit initial contract between the host society and the first tourists, a contract that largely determined the evolution of the tourism aspect of the territory and, in particular, the modalities of its unequal opening up to external actors.

2 Knafou R., Les stations intégrées de sports d’hiver des Alpes françaises. L’aménagement de la montagne « à la française » (“Integrated Ski Resorts in the French Alps: The Development à la française of Mountain Areas”), Masson, 1978.

3 A book reported this experience: L’Institut de Saint-Gervais. Recherche-action dans la montagne touristique (“The Saint-Gervais Institute: Action Research in Tourist Mountains”), Belin, 1997. Collective work edited by Rémy Knafou and coordinated by Mireille Bruston, Florence Deprest and Philippe Duhamel.

4 This resulted in a partial publication entitled Chamonix-Mont-Blanc : les coulisses de l’aménagement (“Chamonix-Mont-Blanc: The Making-Of”), 1990, Grenoble University Press.

5 Its first and only publication was L’annuaire de la recherche géographique francophone (“Directory of French Geographical Research”, 1992, 864 p.), by Mireille Bruston. It must be said that geographers did not really want to be observed and that the whole point behind this venture escaped the geographer in charge of the geographical policy of the CNRS, who was also a specialist in quantitative work. During this period, however, it published a pioneering work, Matériaux pour une sociologie de la géographie (“Materials for a Sociology of Geography” edited by D. Dory, D. Douzant-Rosenfeld and R. Knafou), L’Harmattan (1993), which explains why I was so enthusiastic about the idea of an issue of Via@ tourism review devoted to theoretical contributions by researchers, within the framework of a reflexive approach.

6 MIT: this acronym was adjusted over the years, from “Mobilities, Itineraries, Territories” at the beginning to “Mobilities, Itineraries, Tourism”. Two factors led me to come up with this name. The first was a joking comparison with one of the most famous universities in the world (the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) for a young team without means and initially comprising only four people... The second referred to the importance of various representations in the creation of tourist destinations and imagery.

7 This is a commonplace observation, and one that I had the opportunity of making on several occasions at the time when, in charge of the Festival International de Géographie, I was also responsible for communication on the festival in the media. It is also probably one of the reasons causing some researchers to produce more definite or even radical analyses, likely to receive more attention (E. Todd may fall into this category).

8 The paper by Jean-Claude Vernex, entitled “L’invention des lieux touristiques” (“The Invention of Tourist Destinations”, Le Globe, Revue genevoise de géographie, 1993, volume 133, no. 1, pp. 15-28), made no reference to the paper that concerns us here. And yet, the latter preceded the former by two years, and had appeared in a review that the author had undoubtedly read. Use of the “” software to sort the main online journals [my thanks to Carine Fournier] allowed for identifying 15 articles containing elements of my paper but without mentioning it, and 40 articles referring explicitly to my paper (25% of which in Brazilian publications).

9 Boyer M., L’invention du tourisme, Collection Découvertes, Paris, Éditions Gallimard, 1996, 160 p.

10 With the exception, perhaps, of P. Duhamel who, in his thesis Les résidents étrangers européens à Majorque (Baléares) : pour une analyse de la transformation des lieux touristiques (“European Foreign Residents in Majorca (Balearic Islands): An Analysis of the Transformation of Tourist Destinations”, Paris Diderot University, 1997) broached the subject of my hypothesis. I note that the idea has been quoted in Brazilian and Spanish publications, but, to the best of my knowledge, without any real further study into the subject.

11 The tourist site, the tourist “post”, the tourist resort and the tourist city, the last two being further refined into a city-resort, a touristified city.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Rémy Knafou, « The invention of the tourist destination », Via [En ligne], 13 | 2018, mis en ligne le 01 septembre 2018, consulté le 02 juin 2020. URL : ; DOI :

Haut de page


Rémy Knafou

Professor Emeritus (Geography) at Pantheon-Sorbonne University, Director of the MIT (Mobilities, Itineraries, Tourism) research team (1993-2008)

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page


Université Bretagne Occidentale

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Licence Creative Commons
Via Tourism Review est mis à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.

Haut de page
  • OpenEdition Journals