Anticipated and Regulated Contextual Determinants of Social Innovation in Rural Tourism: The Role of Public Authorities
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study analyzes the contextual determinants anticipated or regulated by public authorities in support of social innovation in rural tourism, using the theory of change as the central analytical framework. Applied to the Marrakech–Safi region—characterized by pronounced territorial disparities and growing environmental vulnerability—the analysis seeks to understand how public action integrates contextual constraints into the design and implementation of territorial policies. Based on a corpus of discourses collected through semi-structured interviews, the study adopts a lexicometric approach combining frequency distribution analysis, correspondence factor analysis, similarity analysis, and word cloud visualization. The results reveal a strong discursive emphasis on local activation dynamics, cooperation, and bottom-up social innovation, reflecting a territorialized orientation of public action. However, mechanisms of strategic anticipation and institutional regulation appear weakly formalized in the discourses, pointing to a partially articulated causal chain of change. Contextual determinants—particularly climatic, economic, and institutional factors—are more often recognized as constraints to be managed than as structuring parameters integrated upstream into public planning. This configuration highlights an imbalance between ex post adaptation and proactive anticipation, as well as a central challenge related to institutional learning. The study thus underscores the need to strengthen the articulation between territorial activation, adaptive regulation, and risk anticipation in order to sustainably support social innovation in rural tourism in the Marrakech–Safi region.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
1. Adger, W. N. (2006). Vulnerability. Global environmental change, 16(3), 268-281.
2. Apostolopoulos, N., Liargovas, P., Stavroyiannis, S., Makris, I., Apostolopoulos, S., Petropoulos, D., & Anastasopoulou, E. (2020). Sustaining Rural Areas, Rural Tourism Enterprises and EU Development Policies: A Multi-Layer Conceptualisation of the Obstacles in Greece. Sustainabil-ity, 12(18), 7687.
3. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reis, (77/78), 345-348.
4. BEPA (Bureau of European Policy Advisers) (2011). Empowering People, Driving Change: Social Innovation in the European Union, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
5. Bock, B. B. (2016). Rural marginalisation and the role of social innovation; a turn towards ex-ogenous development and rural reconnection. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(4), 552-573.
6. Bosworth, G., Annibal, I., Carroll, T., Price, L., Sellick, J., & Shepherd, J. (2016). Empowering Local Action through Neo-Endogenous Development; The Case of LEADER in England. Socio-logia Ruralis, 56(3), 427–449.
7. Bosworth, G., Annibal, I., Carroll, T., Price, L., Sellick, J., & Shepherd, J. (2016). Empowering local action through neo-endogenous development; The case of LEADER in England. Sociologia Ruralis, *56*(3), 427–449.
8. Bowen, T., Del Ninno, C., Andrews, C., Coll-Black, S., Johnson, K., Kawasoe, Y., ... & Williams, A. (2020). Adaptive social protection: building resilience to shocks. World Bank Publications.
9. Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual frame-work. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82, 42-51.
10. Dargan, L., & Shucksmith, M. (2008). LEADER and innovation. Sociologia Ruralis, 48(3), 274–291.
11. Dro, I., Therace, A. and Hubert, A. (2011). Empowering People, Driving Change: Social Inno-vation in the European Union. Brussels: European Commission.
12. Haven-Tang, C., & Jones, E. (2012). Local leadership for rural tourism development: A case study of Adventa, Monmouthshire, UK. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 28–35.
13. Jessop, B. (2002). The future of the capitalist state (Vol. 1, pp. 11-54). Cambridge: Polity.
14. Jungsberg, L., Copus, A., Herslund, L. B., Nilsson, K., Perjo, L., Randall, L., & Berlina, A. (2020). Key actors in community-driven social innovation in rural areas in the Nordic coun-tries. Journal of Rural Studies, *79*, 276–285.
15. Malek, A., & Costa, C. (2015). Integrating communities into tourism planning through social innovation. Tourism Planning & Development, 12(3), 281–299.
16. Martens, K. R. (2011). MQ Patton.(2011). Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use. New York, NY: Guilford Press. 373 pages. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 26(2), 108-110.
17. McAreavey, R., & McDonagh, J. (2011). Sustainable Rural Tourism: Lessons for Rural Devel-opment. Sociologia Ruralis, 51(2), 175–194.
18. Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). General introduction: the return of social innovation as a scientific concept and a social practice. The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary re-search, 1, 1-6.
19. Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Swyngedouw, E. and Gonzalez, S. (2005): "Towards Alternative Model(s) of Local Innovation". Urban Studies, Vol. 42, No. 11, pp. 1669-1990.
20. Nasution, Z., & Sirojuzilman, S. (2023). The mediating role of integrated agritourism cluster development on regional development in Indonesia. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 17(2), 449–469.
21. Neumeier, S. (2012). Why do social innovations in rural development matter and should they be considered more seriously in rural development research? Proposal for a stronger focus on social innovations in rural development research. Sociologia Ruralis, 52(1), 48-69.
22. Neumeier, S. (2012). Why do social innovations in rural development matter and should they be considered more seriously in rural development research? – Proposal for a stronger focus on social innovations in rural development research. Sociologia Ruralis, 52(1), 48-69.
23. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge university press.
24. Novelli, M., Schmitz, B., & Spencer, T. (2006). Networks, clusters and innovation in tourism: A UK experience. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1141–1152.
25. Okech, R., Haghiri, M., and George, B. P. (2012). "Rural tourism as a sustainable development alternative: an analysis with special reference to Luanda, Kenya", Cultur, Special issue, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 36-54.
26. Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American economic review, 100(3), 641-672.
27. Pol, E. and Ville, S. (2009). Social innovation: buzz word or enduring term?, Journal of Socio- Economics, vol. 38, issue. 6, pp. 878- 885.
28. Ray, C. (2006). Neo-endogenous development in the EU. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden, & P. Mooney (Eds.), The handbook of rural studies (pp. 278-291). Sage.
29. Ronningen, M. (2010). Innovation in the Norwegian rural tourism industry: Results from a Norwegian survey. Open Social Science Journal, 3, 15–29.
30. Tardif, C. and Harrison, D. (2005) "Complementarité, convergence et transversalité : la con-ceptualisation e l'innovation sociale au CRISES". Centre de Recherche Sur Les Innovations So-ciales. Cahiers du CRISES. Quebec.
31. Thuesen, A., & Nielsen, N. (2011). Merivanden of LEADER-metoden [The value added by the LEADER method]. Esbjerg: SDU Center for Landdistriktsforskning.
32. Torre, A., & Wallet, F. (Eds.). (2014). Regional development and proximity relations. Edward Elgar Publishing.
33. Trunfio, M., & Campana, S. (2019). Drivers and emerging innovations in knowledge-based destinations: Towards a research agenda. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 14, 100370.
34. Varley, T., & Curtin, C. (2006). The politics of empowerment: Power, populism and partner-ship in rural Ireland. The Economic and Social Review, 37(3), 423–446.
35. Weiss, C. H., & Connell, J. (1995). Nothing as Practical as good theory: exploring theory-based evaluation. Evaluation Practice, 16(2), 145-157.