The TALC, or Tourism Area Life Cycle, has a finite lifespan before it is briefly referenced in current textbooks or articles. The exact reason for its endurance remains uncertain. However, the TALC is regarded as an enduring academic model (Griere 2004), serving as a tool or framework to assist in discussions and research regarding resort development. Its objective is to depict a common pattern of tourist resort development believed to occur in many resorts worldwide.
In the 21st century, given the many different tourist destinations that have been created in recent decades due to changes in transportation, politics, economics, and societies, the argument may appear presumptuous and arrogant. These destinations have emerged in environments and communities that were previously seen as unfriendly or unwelcoming.
Global tourism has been significantly transformed in the past thirty years due to political changes, including the disappearance of the Iron Curtain and communism as well as the end of Apartheid. In addition, countries like China and Vietnam have opened up to tourism. These changes have coincided with the emergence of budget airlines, the world wide web (WWW), and increased affluence worldwide.
Some argue that no other period has seen such significant transformation in tourism over the last three decades.
The world wars, the Great Depression, and the Oil Crisis of the 1970s have had a significant impact on tourism. However, they did not fundamentally alter the geography, economics, and social nature of the industry. Rather, they mainly caused expansion to be delayed. Consequently, some may think that models developed before the late 1980s would no longer apply because of subsequent events. Despite this perception, the TALC model remains relevant for explaining and comprehending how tourist destinations evolve in various circumstances.
This review provides an overview of the origins and early use of the TALC model in tourism research, including its criticisms, modifications, and current relevance. It also examines the basic assumptions of the model and its applicability in today’s changing world.
Research on tourist destinations and resorts has a long history, initially consisting mainly of descriptive case studies. However, Gilbert (1939) was one of the first authors to discuss resort development in a more general and theoretical manner, although limited to England.
The post-World War Two era marked the true beginnings of resort research, focusing on their morphology and development. Early researchers such as Barrett (1958), Christaller (1963), Plog (1972, 1973), and Stansfield (1972) played a significant role in shaping the TALC model as recognized by Butler (G) © Goodfellow Publishers Ltd 4 Tourism Area Life Cycle (1980).
The TALC model, including its origins, has been extensively discussed in previous works by Butler (1990, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2006a,b,c, 2009a,b). However, in this text, it will be briefly addressed. Legiewski (2006) provides a comprehensive review of the TALC’s application until the early 2000s. Numerous references to the TALC can also be found on the World Wide Web, with a search for ‘Tourism Area Life Cycle’ yielding approximately 1,360,000 results (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Tourism+Area+Life+Cycle&hl=en&client=firefoxa&rls =org.mozilla:en-GB:official&prmd=ib&ei=eYdlTLOVLI_QjAfI0dDiCw&start =60&sa=N). The TALC’s origins are based on the belief that tourist destinations are essentially products that have been developed and modified to cater to specific markets (holidaymakers), similar to the production of other goods and services.
The assumption that resorts would follow a similar pattern of development as most other products, known as the “life cycle” (Catry and Chevalier 1974), seemed reasonable. According to this theory, the market initially desires the product, but eventually finds it outdated and unattractive (Avlonitis 1990). Although the life cycle model has lost popularity in business literature, it still holds some relevance (Dhalla and Yuspeh 1976; Tellis and Crawford 1981).
Examples from different industries, like automobile manufacturing, demonstrate the typical pattern of market acceptance for new products. In most cases, markets gradually embrace a new product, become highly enthusiastic, resulting in a quick sales growth. However, eventually, the market loses interest and sales start to decline. It is very rare for a product to experience immediate success (such as the E type Jaguar), sustain sales for decades (like the Volkswagen Beetle), or have a resurgence (as with the Mini). These exceptional cases usually indicate the presence of genius or genuine innovation in the initial model.
In the majority of cases, models undergo gradual change, which includes enhancements in performance, alterations in structure and design, and the inclusion of new features. These changes are intended to preserve an existing market or attract a new one. Tourist resorts follow a similar pattern, except for one significant aspect: control. While most commercial products are produced by a single company that maintains control over the product’s design, production, and marketing, most tourism resorts are not administered by a single controlling entity. As a result, their individual components frequently demonstrate a notable inability to coordinate their product offerings or marketing efforts.
One of the main reasons why modifications and improvements are more challenging to implement in tourist resorts compared to most manufactured products is the sheer diversity in elements within the resorts, including their size, ambition, and focus. Additionally, these component parts may lack a common direction or goal, and there may be no clear controlling force. Moreover, tourist resorts provide an intangible experiential product that consumers need to travel to and cannot be stored for future market changes. The original TALC model also simplified the integration of ecological models.
Criticism has been raised regarding the use of the term “evolution” in relation to tourism resorts (Ravenscroft and Hadjihambi 2006). This criticism stems from the argument that resorts are not living entities and therefore cannot undergo evolution in the strict sense proposed by Darwin. However, the term “evolution” is commonly used to describe a process of natural or uncontrolled change along a consistent path, which aligns with its usage in the concept of the Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC). While resorts are not living organisms, they are dynamic in nature. (G) © Goodfellow Publishers Ltd Tourism Area Life Cycle 5
The rate at which changes occur in tourist destinations is significantly different from the natural evolutionary process of species. However, one can argue that the development process they experience is similar to evolution in that it tends to be gradual and involves adjustments to ensure survival in a competitive environment (Ritchie and Crouch 2003). According to Ravenscroft and Hadjihambi (2006: 163), changes in tourist destinations should be viewed from an evolutionary perspective. In this perspective, the external environment is seen as influenced by the principles of Darwinian selection, while changes to the built environment are shaped by Lamarckian inherited traits.
Therefore, it can be deduced that if a resort does not undergo necessary changes, it is likely to become extinct or suffer economic decline. This was the main argument in the initial model, as indicated by the subtitle of the 1980 article which was “Implications for Management of Resources” (Butler 1980). The purpose of this comment was to emphasize to readers that resorts would experience decline in some form if there was no intervention to effectively manage their resources in order to remain competitive in the tourist market.
The intervention mentioned in the text does not occur naturally like in biological evolution. Instead, it is the result of deliberate actions taken by individuals who care about the wellbeing and ongoing appeal of the destination. The model being discussed does not claim that all resorts will inevitably decline, as Plog (1972) had previously suggested. However, without appropriate interventions, decline is highly likely. The attention given to the “Cycle of Evolution” and the figure (Figure 1) in the original article seems to have diverted focus from the argument about the necessity of intervention for survival.
The figure emerged from previous papers that discussed destination location and development. These papers, such as Brougham and Butler (1972), focused on the idea that new development should not occur in declining resorts. Instead, it should be located in nearby sites that have similar physical features to the original resorts. The argument was that when development and growth reach their peak, smart developers would look for new locations with lower costs, untouched resources, and more opportunities for expansion.
The main focus was to determine the point at which the peak was reached. The initial model did not address the potential predictability of the model, which other researchers (Manente and Pechlaner 2006, Berry 2006) explored later. As mentioned elsewhere (Butler 2006a,c), the TALC was a product of its time and its origins were influenced by the literature available in the 1970s. This literature included works by notable tourism researchers such as Christaller (1963), Cohen (1972), Doxey (1975), Plog (1973), Stansfield (1972), and Wolfe (1966).
Despite their limited validity in the eyes of many contemporary readers and researchers in tourism, these references may still hold value. It is probable that most of them lack thorough empirical research and would not meet today’s rigorous review standards for academic journals. However, it is worth noting that this critique could be more reflective of the current state of journal reviewing rather than an indication of the articles’ worth. Despite their flaws, these articles provided innovative and insightful ideas, contributing significantly to the theoretical advancement of tourism research.
The TALC model represents the characteristics of tourism in the 1970s, a period marked by the rapid growth of destinations due to the advent of jet aircraft and increased prosperity in western countries. This prosperity was partially fueled by the economic advancement of credit cards, which resulted in decreased travel restrictions and a significant rise in mobility. As a result, international travel became accessible to a larger segment of the population, leading to the establishment of mass tourism in its recognizable modern form, and possibly approaching a post-modern form.
Thus, fundamental changes were happening in markets, taste preferences, destination locations, and modes of travel for many potential tourists in the western world. These changes were becoming more apparent in tourist resorts, especially ones that were established a century or so ago and relied on limited restricted markets and railways. © Goodfellow Publishers Ltd 6 Tourism Area Life Cycle
Figure 1: Hypothetical evolution of a tourist area (Butler 1980). Framing the Field The model was created to highlight the ever-changing nature of tourist destinations and introduce a generalized process for their development and potential decline. This process could be prevented through appropriate interventions, such as planning, management, and development. The article’s title further emphasizes the importance of resource management.
The proposal outlined a standard progression of resorts with various stages: exploration, involvement, development, consolidation, stagnation, and possibilities ranging from rejuvenation to decline (Figure 1). Central to this was the idea of carrying capacity. If the resort exceeded its carrying capacity, its attractiveness would diminish, resulting in decreased competitiveness and a decline in visitor numbers, investment, and development.
The appropriate interventions mentioned earlier are essential for avoiding exceeding the different carrying capacities (economic, social-cultural, and environmental) of the resort. If possible, these interventions should also aim to increase the carrying capacities to cope with growing pressures. It is important to acknowledge that in the 1970s, the concept of carrying capacity in tourism was popular, but it has since lost its popularity (Butler 1996, 2010). The success of destinations in the tourist market heavily relies on a variety of resources.
Initially, the tourist market in developed western countries in the northern hemisphere primarily viewed tourist destinations as coastal or connected to water sources. These destinations offered accommodations, related facilities, and convenient transportation, often by public means. Over time, as the market expanded and individuals became more affluent and mobile, their expectations and demands for quality increased.
Tourism Area Life Cycle 7 involves improvements in infrastructure and facilities, a wider range of attractions, and more affordable and convenient access from travelers’ home regions. Resorts that failed to adapt to these changes quickly lost popularity and were replaced by new resorts in undeveloped locations with desirable features like climate, water, and space.
Technology is replacing certain attributes, and sometimes even all of them. This is particularly evident in places like Dubai, Las Vegas, and Macao, as well as the Disney theme parks. These locations use technological features such as rides and artificial experiences, as well as massive luxury hotels that often imitate real-world locations, such as Venetian, Luxor, and New York. They also utilize pseudo movie sets and artificial ski slopes in areas with temperatures of 40C or higher. All of these technological substitutes take the place of traditional beaches and cultural heritage.
Considering the significant changes in destinations, particularly at one end of the destination spectrum (Prideaux 2000), it is valid to question the relevance of the TALC model. This model was designed for destinations that emerged decades ago, initially relying on railways for access to their limited markets. These destinations had few amenities or attractions and heavily depended on repeat visitors who were not mobile during their stay. It is not unexpected that modern destinations deviate from the exact progression of development and decline outlined in the TALC model.
When the original model was proposed, it was believed that certain destinations might take a century or longer to go through the cycle. However, the consensus now is that destinations go through this cycle in just a few decades at most. This is due to the rapid rate of change in the global economy and society caused by technological advancements and other factors. Destinations that rely on technology are especially susceptible to becoming outdated.
Market options for holiday destinations are now extensive due to a wide array of transportation choices. In the past, limited options restricted travelers to just a few destinations. However, this is no longer the case as one can now reach almost any part of the world within 24 hours comfortably and safely. Additionally, budget airline travel allows for remarkably inexpensive journeys. As a result, the necessity for repeat visits has diminished, and holidaymakers now have numerous options to choose from, leading to a decline in destination loyalty.
Other researchers have shown considerable interest in the TALC model. During the first 25 years after its publication, the model was applied and examined in various ways and locations. Lagiewski (2006) provides a comprehensive review of the relevant literature from this period. Despite the ever-changing nature of tourism and the factors that affect both tourism and resorts, the TALC continues to be applied and tested. This is evident in the studies conducted by Dodds and McElroy (2008), Cole (2009), Komppula et al (2010), and Pechlaner et al (2010). These studies suggest that the TALC remains relevant even in dynamic situations.
According to Kapczynski and Szromak (2008), Polish spas have adhered to the TALC pattern despite significant changes in Poland over the past fifty years. However, in recent years, they have successfully moved past a decline phase and entered a new phase of expansion. Typically, proactive planning and development are only prioritized in resorts once decline or stagnation begins, rather than being implemented as reactive measures.
Cohen–Hattab and Shoval (2004) suggest that resorts reaching the end of their life cycles may be attributed to a failure in adhering to established planning policies, as demonstrated in their research in Israel. Additionally, the TALC model has been applied in various contexts other than resorts. Xie and Lane (2006), for instance, present a modified version of the original model in their study on Aboriginal Arts Performance in Tourism, introducing a ‘cycle of authenticity’ based on the TALC.
In following an argument made by the author in an obscure publication (Butler 1997) and an unpublished illustration that made a similar point (Figure 2), it is logical to adapt the model to examine the life cycle of specific events in resorts and other locations.
Studying the impact of crises and negative events on tourism places is a common practice due to the occurrence of tragedies. In their analysis, Putra and Hitchcock (2006) utilized a model to examine redevelopment and the life cycle following the Bali bombing in 2002. Similarly, Cohen (2008) investigated the effect of the tsunami on Thailand, observing that this disaster served as a catastrophic ‘shock’ to both the destination and its development pattern. Further discussion on this topic will be provided below.
Moss et al (2003) applied the cycle model to analyze both the Twin Towers destruction in New York and the Madrid train bombings in relation to acts of terrorism. In their study, they incorporated the magnitude of the event, the duration of its impact, and the pattern of its life cycle. According to their findings, it is the first study to examine these aspects. They discovered that tourist air travel following these catastrophes follows scalable and fad life cycles (op cit p. 207).
In a more traditional manner, Kompulla et al (2010) employed the model to examine the life cycle of Christmas in Lapland, a product that is closely associated with the area’s image and specific local offerings. Nelson (2008) featured this product in Surf Economics, discussing its life cycle within the context of surfing sites. Additionally, Tomljenovic and Getz (2009) applied the model to wine tourism, particularly the development of wine tourism regions in Croatia. Their study incorporated the perspectives and attitudes of winery owners.
Whitfield (2008) studied the application of the model to cyclical aspects of conference tourism in the UK. The study specifically focused on the use of refurbishments as triggers for rejuvenation, which could also be applied to resorts. Similarly, Sundt (2006) analyzed hotels in Switzerland using a life cycle perspective.
The TALC, along with other models, was also utilized by Duffus and Dearden (1990) in the context of wildlife tourism to demonstrate how alterations in demand can impact specific ‘products’ and aid in the management of wildlife resources, an approach also proposed by Weizenegger (2006). Additional researchers have analyzed tourist area life cycles using various methods and alternative models. For instance, Toh et al (2001) employed a travel balance approach in their examination of the tourism life cycle of Singapore.
Cole (2009) conducted a study using logistic modeling to analyze the TALC (Tourism Area Life Cycle). The study aimed to determine whether the tourism industry exhibited chaotic dynamics, and the findings showed distinct differences compared to traditional growth models. Chinese researchers have also applied more advanced modeling techniques, such as those mentioned above by Xu (2001), Xie (1995), and Yi (2001), to study the TALC. Additionally, the model has been utilized in various physical and cultural contexts, both conventionally (Bao 1994, 1998) and with more advanced techniques.
The TALC has been applied to gambling, such as Moss et al’s (2003; 393) use of the model to analyze casino winnings. They found that casinos follow Butler’s S-shaped product life cycle for resorts, indicating that the initial surge in gaming revenues may not continue without industry rejuvenation. The application of the TALC to gambling is intriguing since one might have assumed that a resort like Las Vegas would be in decline by now.
The ongoing success and popularity of Las Vegas is no longer due to its exclusive control over legalized gambling in the United States, which had made it stand out and resistant to excessive development. This advantage was lost when gambling became legal in New Jersey (and subsequently in almost every other state in the US) as well as on Indian reserves (Stansfield 1996, 2006).
The ongoing success of Las Vegas depends on ongoing renovations, replacements, and additions to its attractions. This means that major developers need to make appropriate interventions, and the local and state administrations need to provide support. Despite not being an ideal model for sustainability, energy conservation, and maintaining authenticity, Las Vegas demonstrates how a destination can still attract a market, even in a volatile industry with numerous alternatives available.
Las Vegas is potentially one-of-a-kind, though Macao and Dubai may achieve similar status over time. Regardless, its potential uniqueness demonstrates the continued relevance of the TALC model. While it may experience a downfall due to an economic downturn, increased energy prices, or a widespread rejection of gambling, it is expected to persist, challenging academics and advocates for a more straightforward, less extravagant, and energy-efficient vacation destination. This resilience helps uphold the underlying concepts embedded in the Tourism Area Life Cycle.
The TALC article has sparked criticism, rejection, and alternative suggestions about the development process of destinations. While the first application of the model (Hovinen 1981) emerged a year after the original article, criticism took longer to surface (Wall 1982a,b, Hayward 1986).
Wall’s comments regarding the concept of carrying capacity in tourist areas and its application to the development cycle were mainly conceptual. It is possible that these comments were linked to the decrease in interest in the topic of carrying capacity in a tourist context over the past few decades (Butler 2010). However, no further action has been taken on his concerns. On the other hand, Hayward’s early criticisms focused on various specific issues (Lagiewski 2006), such as measurement problems and the identification of the stages outlined in the model.
A later review of the model (Hayward 2006: 29) acknowledged that many of the issues discussed earlier had not been completely resolved. Additionally, it pointed out that within the industry, the TALC concept is largely ignored. As a result, the review suggested that a reconceptualization of the TALC may be necessary. It emphasized the importance of overcoming operational ambiguity and recognizing tourism as a living system. The review also highlighted the need to identify constraints and consider the application of chaos theory to destination development (op cit: 30).
Some researchers have proposed abandoning or rejecting the TALC, including Neil Leiper (2004: 135) who strongly argued for placing the model in the archives of history, as it has been discredited and proven false. The model has also faced criticisms for its lack of validity or shortcomings, with alternative approaches suggested by Choy (1992), Bianchi (1994), Prideaux (2000), and McKercher (2006). Aguilo, et al (2005) contended that the model is primarily theoretical, while others like Getz (1992) have supported its relevance in tourism planning.
Prosser (1995) highlighted several criticisms of the model which include doubts about there being a single model of resort development, limitations on capacity issues, limitations of the life cycle model itself, a lack of empirical evidence, and limited practical utility. Despite the extensive criticism, Prosser concluded that researchers continue to adopt the model as a framework for their research. According to Prosser, the original model remains largely intact and still offers the potential for further development. The resort life cycle concept shows no signs of being dissuaded, considering the wide variety of resorts and environments.
Given the diverse environments and various forms of tourism, it is not unexpected that the model may not be relevant or accurate in specific locations or types of resorts. As mentioned by this author in a previous article (Butler 2004: 167), it may be more suitable to question its validity in the present century rather than expecting it to explain all instances of destination development entirely. However, the fact that researchers continue to use the model to assess resorts indicates that its validity is still worth exploring.
However, some researchers have made valuable critiques and observations regarding the utilization of the model in their studies. Papatheodorou (2004) highlighted the lack of literature on the relationship between the development process and competition in the TALC. In the tourism industry, there is competition among resorts at one level and competitiveness among individual enterprises at another level. The ultimate tourist flow pattern (demand) incorporates these competition elements, as well as consumer preferences and limitations.
The TALC’s ability to incorporate the various influences from competition at different scales is likely to be limited, as competition is dynamic and subject to individual actors. Papatheodorou (2006: 81) argued that the TALC’s demand management policies should be complemented by an integrated, supply-driven planning framework.
In essence, one can argue that such a call supports the original idea of appropriate intervention at the resort level. However, it also takes it a step further by recognizing the competitive element between resorts and the need to reconcile this with a more regional spatial outlook. This approach aims to maximize benefits to an area through enhancing competitiveness and ultimately supporting their shared future. Papatheodorou (2006) shares a similar perspective with Coles (2006), placing the TALC in the context of related retailing and marketing models.
According to the author, many of the criticisms directed towards the business Life Cycle model also apply to the TALC. These criticisms include concerns about treating products as living entities, the lack of validity for different categories and forms, the difficulty in defining phases, and accurately placing a product on the curve at a given time (op cit 56). Additionally, the author points out that the model does not explicitly consider price competition or individual actions.
The topic of the text is about entrepreneurship and the different types of tourism in mass tourism destinations and how they affect demand, behavior, and promotion. It is argued that resorts decline when they become unattractive to customers and are no longer competitive at both the local and global scales.
The issue of price is implicitly included in the original model and is further discussed in subsequent papers. These papers mention the tendency of destinations to decrease prices in order to maintain their market and competitiveness during a decline in visitor numbers. The authors criticized the lack of focus on individual entrepreneurship and the impact of key individuals in the development of resorts. This criticism has been addressed in later contributions to the literature, especially by Russell (Russell 2006b; Russell and Faulkner 1999;).
Gale and Botteril (2005) have emphasized the significance of local resident opinions and actions, especially in the local political context. Recently, publications have also highlighted the role of individual people in both establishing resorts and influencing global tourism (Butler and McDonnell forthcoming; Butler and Russell 2010).
The topic of the TALC and destinations has also been discussed by Weaver (1988, 1990). He highlights that in some economies, such as plantation societies, it may not be the local indigenous population who first engage in tourism development. Instead, it could be local-resident ex-patriots who possess the necessary capital and expertise to cater to the tourist market.
It is a matter of controversy, both semantically and politically, as well as anthropologically, whether this group is perceived differently by the local residents mentioned in the original TALC paper (Butler 1980), or if expatriates have assimilated into the ‘local population’. Nevertheless, it is evident that there are differences in the initial stages of resort development in various economies and societies, thus necessitating further study on this aspect.
Rather, there has been a significant debate regarding the precision of the TALC in depicting the advanced phases of destination development and whether it requires supplementing the model with additional stages. Agarwal (1994; 1997; 1999; 2002) has extensively examined this aspect, and her critiques and contributions have received support from Priestley and Mundet (1998), Knowles and Curtis (1999), and Smith (2002).
Agarwal has proposed the inclusion of an extra step to consider the various efforts of restructuring that have been initiated.
