.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Proactive vs reactive destination revitalisation
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
B
G
N
DOI：10.1016/j.tourman.2026.105496.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Destinations evolve through lifecycles, with a very real risk of entering long-term decline in the post-maturity phase. Decline is not inevitable, though, for it depends on whether destination stakeholders recognise early symptoms and respond appropriately. Unfortunately, the literature suggests that timely, anticipatory responses are rare. Instead, most destinations fail to detect or act on early warning signals and only respond reactively after decline has set in. This paper develops a conceptual model that identifies and contrasts reactive and proactive responses to post-maturity decline. The model is derived from a systematic synthesis of case-study evidence of 50 case studies examining destination decline and attempts at rejuvenation.
Keywords:
Lifecycle
Destination. Reactive
Proactive
Systematic review
Journal
IF:
12.4
Papers:
5.7K
Citations:
3.4W
Organization
No organization information available
Cited Papers