近20年来中外探险旅游研究进展的可视化对比分析

文化旅游中的户外探险活动充满刺激 #生活乐趣# #生活体验# #生活乐趣探索# #文化旅游体验#

1 Introduction

Adventure tourism is thought to have originated in the second half of the 19th century in economically developed countries such as Europe and the United States. It only began to develop on a large scale after World War II (Warner and Dillenschneider, 2019), and became popular in Europe and the United States by the middle and late 20th century. Currently, countries such those in as Western Europe and North America have gradually formed a diversified form and professional organization and management, as well as a mature security system professional tourism development model. In terms of the developmental stage, adventure tourism has entered a mature and consolidated stage. Adventure tourism has developed into a more mature form of tourism, and safety research results are also integrated into social practice, which is reflected in various ways. For example, the adventure behavior of tourists is regulated by the relevant industry associations; the rescue mechanism and facilities for tourists and the equipment is also relatively complete; and the professional education and social service system for adventure tourism is also relatively complete. Studies have shown that adventure tourism and related expenditures contribute USD 220 billion to the U.S. economy each year (Warner and Dillenschneider, 2019).

In recent years, with the rapid development of China’s economy and the increasing improvement of people’s living standards, the demand for tourism experiences is also growing. Marine tourism, religious tourism, red tourism, adventure tourism and other forms of tourism activities are rapidly increasing in popularity, and as a cross-fertilization of sports and the tourism mode, adventure tourism is also preferred by the majority of youth groups and outdoor tourism enthusiasts (Chen, 2019). With 2021 as the opening year of the “Fourteenth Five-Year Plan”, based on the new economy, new infrastructure, new customer base and new demand, the State Council has issued the “State Council General Office on Promoting the Development of Territorial Tourism” and “General Office of the State Council Concept and Opinions on Further Stimulating the Potential of Culture and Tourism Consumption” and other documents to guide and promote the innovation of tourism products, and to promote tourism consumption and industry upgrading, and adventure tourism is one of the important innovative products (Zhou et al., 2018). In China, due to the short development time of adventure tourism, it is still a relatively new form of tourism in the tourism industry. This short history has led to some problems. For example, the professional talent training time has been relatively short, the professional training mode is still in the continuous exploration and development phase, the management of adventure tourism is not fully aware of the industry management which is not standardized. In the development process of adventure tourism there are also many problems, such as improper organization, lack of professional knowledge, singular tourism products, lack of rescue teams, improper legal supervision and others (Wang, 2016). In addition, due to the lack of publicity and promotion, the awareness of adventure tourism among residents is still low and the real market size is still relatively small. At the same time, the lack of awareness of adventure tourism among tourists and operators and the imperfect rescue system have led to frequent casualties (Zhang, 2010). In terms of the development stage, adventure tourism in China is still generally in the initial development stage.

In terms of the sites where adventure tourism is carried out, both domestic and foreign adventure tourism is carried out in national forest parks and public lands as the objective carriers (Yan, 2017). In terms of the connotation of the concept of adventure tourism, the interpretation of adventure tourism among foreign scholars is more inclined to base the interpretation on the form of the adventure rather than the concept. Scholars believe that although nature and the wilderness environment play an important role in adventure tourism, it is quite different from ecotourism because of the risks and challenges usually involved in adventure tourism. In China, adventure tourism has been studied from a more theoretical perspective, lacking a holistic understanding of adventure tourism, and the concepts of adventure tourism and ecotourism are often confused.

Since China’s adventure tourism lags behind the systems in foreign countries, both in practice and in theoretical research, it is crucial to systematically compare the domestic and foreign literature on adventure tourism in order to understand the current situation and shortcomings of our research, so as to reveal the directions for the next research phase and to guide the high-quality development of adventure tourism in China.

2 Research methodology and data sources

2.1 Research methodology

In this study, CiteSpace V software was used to visualize and analyze the current status and hotspots of adventure research (Chen, 2006), and the geospatial distributions of research institutions were visualized through ArcGIS (Xiao et al., 2020). Compared with traditional review-type research methods, this method not only overcomes the shortcomings in the selection of data on the topic under study, but also enables a more comprehensive and systematic analysis for summarizing the spatial and temporal distribution of data, the designated subject areas, and the distributions of authors and journals (Li et al., 2022).

2.2 Data sources

The CNKI database and WOS (Web of Science) core database were used as the data sources. A literature search was conducted in CNKI, under the condition of “theme” for “adventure”, and then a secondary search was conducted under the condition of “theme” for “Tourism”, starting from 2000, and ending on December 31, 2021. This strategy retrieved 850 “all searches” articles on adventure tourism research, including 491 articles from “academic journals” (113 in “core journals”, from “SCI journals”, “Peking University core journals” and “CSSCI”), 129 “master’s and doctoral theses”, and 230 other articles from the non-academic literature. The literature search in the core database of WOS (Web of Science) was conducted by selecting “Adventure” under the condition of “Topic” and then a secondary search for “Tourism” under the “Topic” condition, from 2000 to December 31, 2021. This search retrieved 562 “all searches” articles on adventure tourism research, including 402 “papers” and 160 other items from the non-academic literature.

In order to avoid a large amount of complicated data that may not highlight the research focus in the graphical expression, it is difficult to reflect the status of scholars’ research on adventure tourism. Therefore, the 491 articles from academic journals (including 113 from core journals) in CNKI and 402 journal articles in WOS were selected for analysis. Compared to selecting only Chinese and foreign core journals, this literature base has wider coverage and is more generalized. Items from conference reports, newspapers, introduction of results, colophons, unauthored works and irrelevant content were excluded. Ultimately, a total of 473 papers were analyzed, including 131 papers in Chinese and 342 papers in English. The sample was processed by the 2021 software CiteSpace 5.8.R3 (32-bit), and the data for authors, institutions, and keywords were analyzed separately.

3 Analysis of results

3.1 Analysis of phased issuance trends

The number of articles published and the time of publication are two of the important criteria for determining the attention of a research field. In this study, the meaning of adventure tourism was searched in China Knowledge Network (CNKI) as the subject term, analyzed by CiteSpace software, and organized by Excel software to generate the mapping of the number of publications (Fig. 1). The number of publications in Chinese in 2006 was the most in the 20 years at 72, and the number of publications in foreign languages in 2015 was the most in the 20 years at 73. According to the magnitudes and trends of the changes in the frequency of the two sets of literature, the number of articles published in the Chinese literature increased rapidly from 2000 to 2006 and reached a peak in 2006; then it decreased sharply from 2006 to 2007 and showed a fluctuating downward trend from 2007 to 2021. In contrast, the number of foreign language literature items showed a fluctuating downward trend in 2000-2006, a rapid decline in 2006-2007 followed by a fluctuating upward trend in 2007-2015 with a peak in 2015; and then a fluctuating downward trend from 2015-2021.

Fig. 1 Comparison of the frequencies of Chinese and foreign research literature on adventure tourism, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

Overall, the number of items in the foreign literature is greater than the number in the Chinese literature. However, the numbers of domestic and foreign research publications both showed a rapid rise or fluctuating upward trend during 2000-2006, a rapid decline in 2006-2007, and a fluctuating downward trend during 2015-2021. The number of foreign research publications showed a fluctuating upward trend during 2006-2015, and the number of Chinese research publications showed a fluctuating downward trend.

3.2 Analysis of the collaboration network of researchers

The CiteSpace author collaboration network co-occurrence analysis was used to obtain the author collaboration map of foreign researchers on adventure tourism from 2000-2021 (Fig. 2). This map shows that the relationships among those engaged in adventure tourism research were generally decentralized, with a total of 49 authors who had an overall publication volume of two or more articles.The top twelve scholars in terms of number of publications were Ralf Buckley, Susan Houge Macke, Fanne Terwiel, Tracey Dickson, Gill Pomfret, Gordon Waddington, Marcus Hansen, John Hosea Kerr, Alan Fyall, Alan Ewert, Nigel Hardiman and David Newsome. Of these authors, Ralf Buckley had the highest number of articles at 19, or 4.0% of the total number of articles in the survey, while Susan Houge Macke and Fanne Terwiel each had 17 (3.6%); Tracey Dickson had 16 articles (3.4%); Gill Pomfret had 15 articles (3.2%); and Gordon Waddington, Marcus Hansen, John Hosea Kerr, Alan Fyall, Alan Ewert, Nigel Hardiman, and David Newsome, each had 14 articles (3.0%). The author co-occurrence network had a total of 342 nodes, 221 inter-node links, and a network density of 0.0038 (Fig. 2). Note that the size of an author node is proportional to the number of publications, inter-node links indicate authorship and collaboration, and the thickness of a line segment is proportional to the degree of close collaboration, which shows that the current foreign adventure tourism researchers are generally dispersed. The researchers can be divided into three categories according to the map. One category is researchers with three nodes or more, such as Ralf Buckley, Alan Fyall, Tracey Dickson, Susan Houge Macke, indicating that a large or small research team of three or more people has been formed, among which Ralf Buckley, Fanne Terwiel, Tracey J Dickson, and other authors form a slightly larger research team. The second category is a two-two collaborative network with Shelley Burgin, Nigel Hardiman, and other authors; and the third is the independent research scholar represented by Elizabeth S Vidon, Esther Bott, and others.

Fig. 2 Collaborative authorship network map of foreign studies in adventure tourism, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

Through the CiteSpace institutional collaboration network co-occurrence analysis, and collated using Excel software, the institutional distribution table of foreign research on adventure tourism from 2000-2021 was obtained (Table 1). The distribution includes 13 institutions with five or more publications, mainly concentrated in higher education institutions. The institution with the highest number of publications was Griffith University with 23 publications, accounting for 4.9% of the total publications, followed by Thomson Rivers University and Otago University with 12 and 11 publications, accounting for 2.6% and 2.3% of the total publications, respectively. In terms of the relationships between regional research institutions, the numbers of both research institutions and publications in North America and Europe are greater than those in other regions.

Table 1 Institutional distribution of adventure tourism research, 2000-2021 Serial number Research Institution Number of publications 1 Griffith University 23 2 Thompson River University 12 3 University Otago 11 4 Hong Kong Polytechnic University 9 5 James Cook University 8 6 University of Canberra 7 7 India University 7 8 Chiayi University 5 9 North West University 5 10 Bournemouth University 5 11 Clemson University 5 12 University of Johannesburg 5 13 School of Tourism Management, Beijing Second Foreign Language Institute 5 14 Institute of Geographical Sciences and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences 3 15 Guizhou Province Tourism Resources Development and Utilization Engineering Technology Research Center 3 16 Guizhou Institute of Mountain Resources 2 17 Southeastern University 2 18 School of Geographical Sciences, Southwestern University 2 19 Yunnan Normal University 2 20 Beijing Institute of Petrochemical Technology 2 21 Haikou School of Economics College of Tourism 2 22 Zhejiang Yuexiu College of Foreign Languages, Foreign Economic Management Branch 2 23 Hunan Radio and Television University 2 24 Qingdao Hotel Management Vocational and Technical College 2

The co-occurrence analysis of CiteSpace’s institutional collaboration network was used to obtain a map of the foreign language institutional collaboration in adventure tourism research from 2000-2021 (Fig. 3). In terms of institutional cooperation co-occurrence, there are 289 nodes, 194 inter-node links, and a network density of 0.0047. In this map, the node size indicates the number of papers published by the research institution, and the inter-node links indicate the strength of cooperation between institutions, which shows that relatively close cooperation relationships have been formed between institutions. Among them, the group formed by Griffith University and Thomson Rivers University as the core is the most significant large institutional cooperation network; followed by the small institutional cooperation network formed by other institutions such as Otago University and Bournemouth University; the third is the two cooperative research institution network formed by University of Queensland and Prince of Songwon University; and the fourth is the independent research institutions, such as Murdoch University, University of Cordoba, and others.

Fig. 3 Collaboration map of foreign language institutions for adventure tourism research, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

The CiteSpace author collaboration network co-occurrence analysis was used to obtain the collaboration map of domestic adventure tourism researchers from 2000-2021 (Fig. 4). The overall relationship between the people engaged in adventure tourism research showed decentralized characteristics overall, including 21 authors with more than two publications. The top six authors in terms of number of publications were 10 scholars, namely, Zhang H C, Cao Z H, Zou T Z, Chen Y, Hu X C, Yan Z W, Deng X T, Ma R, Qian R, and Li J Y. Among them, Zhang H C and Cao Z H issued the most articles, with 30 each, accounting for 6.3% of the total number of articles; Zou T Z published 28 articles (5.9%); Chen Y published 26 articles (5.5%); Hu X C published 24 articles (5.1%), and Yan Z W, Deng X T, Ma R, Qian R, Li J Y each published 23 articles (4.9%). In terms of author co-occurrence, there are 136 nodes, 112 inter-node links, and a network density of 0.0122, where the size of the author nodes is proportional to the number of publications, the inter-node links indicate authorship and cooperation, and the thickness of the lines is proportional to the degree of coop-eration (Chen et al., 2015). This map shows that the current domestic adventure tourism researchers are generally dispersed, and the researchers can be roughly divided into three categories. One category is Zhang H C, Cao Z H, Qian R and other researchers with three nodes connected, indicating the formation of a large or small research team of more than three people, of which the six-member research team with Zou T Z as the core is slightly larger. The second category is Ding J, Li J and others in two cooperative research networks; and the third category is the independent research scholars represented by Qiu Y, Cheng X and others.

Fig. 4 Collaboration map of Chinese research authors in adventure tourism research, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

Through CiteSpace institutional cooperation network co-occurrence analysis, and collated using Excel software with the condition that the number of articles issued is not less than two, the institutional distribution table of Chinese research on adventure tourism from 2000 to 2021 was obtained (Table 1). Based on the number of articles issued, 12 institutions have more than two articles, mainly concentrated in higher education institutions and research institutes. The institution with the largest number of articles is the School of Tourism Management of Beijing Second Foreign Language Institute, with eight articles, accounting for 1.7% of the total number of articles, followed by the Institute of Geographical Sciences and Resources of Chinese Academy of Sciences and Guizhou Tourism Resources Development and Utilization Engineering Technology Research Center, with 3 articles (0.6%). The remaining institutions issued two articles, accounting for 0.4% of the total number of articles.

Through the co-occurrence analysis of CiteSpace’s institutional cooperation network, the cooperation map of Chinese research institutions for adventure tourism research from 2000 to 2021 was obtained (Fig. 5). The primary institutions focusing on adventure tourism research mainly include two major categories: higher education institutions and resource research institutes. The secondary institutions are mainly concentrated in colleges of tourism and colleges of social sciences and resource management in universities. In terms of geographic distribution, the institutions focusing on adventure tourism research involve universities in Beijing, Nanjing, and Yunnan, as well as representative high-level tourism research institutions in the central and eastern regions of China. In terms of institutional cooperation co-occurrence, there are 68 nodes, 16 inter-node links, and a network density of 0.007, where the node size indicates the number of papers published by the research institution, and the inter-node links indicate the strength of cooperation between different institutions (Qu and Liu, 2018). Accordingly, there are relatively few domestic institutions involved in adventure tourism research, and the cooperation between them is relatively weak and not close. Among them, the group consisting of Southeast University, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, and China University of Geosciences represents the most remarkable institutional cooperation network; followed by the cooperation network consisting of two cooperative institutions, such as Beijing Second Institute of Foreign Languages and China Institute of Petrochemical Technology; and the third is independent research institutions, such as Zhejiang Yuexiu Institute of Foreign Languages and Shanghai Institute of Physical Education.

Fig. 5 Adventure tourism Chinese institutional cooperation map, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

Based on the geospatial distribution analysis of the issuing institutions according to ArcGIS software, the geospatial distributions of Chinese research institutions (Fig. 6) and the Chinese research literature in adventure tourism (Fig. 7) were obtained. In terms of the number of research institutions, the provinces with the most research institutions are Beijing, Jiangsu, and Guizhou, followed by Hainan, Zhejiang, Sichuan, and Yunnan. Among them, 10 research institutions occur in Beijing, nine in Jiangsu, seven in Guizhou, and four each in Hainan, Zhejiang, Sichuan, and Yunnan. In terms of the number of articles issued, Beijing, Jiangsu and Guizhou have the highest numbers of articles issued, followed by Hainan, Zhejiang, Sichuan, Yunnan and Chongqing, which is consistent with the data for the number of research institutions. Among them, 18 articles were published in Beijing, 10 in Jiangsu, eight in Guizhou, five each in Zhejiang and Hainan, and four each in Yunnan, Sichuan and Chongqing.

Fig. 6 Geospatial distribution of Chinese research institutions in adventure tourism research, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

Fig. 7 Geospatial distribution of Chinese research literature in adventure tourism, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

In summary, foreign adventure tourism research scholars mainly work in two-person or three-person collaborative groups; four-person research teams are rare and scattered; and eight large research teams of five or more people appear but they are widely distributed. In China, the vast majority of adventure tourism research is conducted in two-person collaborative groups; a small number of three-person or four-person research teams have emerged; and there are only three large research teams of five or more people, which are rare and widely distributed. Adventure tourism research institutions abroad are mostly universities and research institutes, with a close network of cooperation and cross-regional cooperation, forming research teams with multiple institutions as the core, involving a wide range of cross-disciplines, and the numbers of research institutions and publications in North America and Europe are greater than those in other regions. The research institutions in China are mostly universities and research institutes, the cooperation network between them is sparse, the existing cooperation is mostly concentrated in the same university or within the same geographical area, with less cross-regional and cross-unit cooperation, and the numbers of research institutions and publications in Beijing, Jiangsu and Guizhou are greater than those in other regions. Foreign adventure tourism researchers have formed close ties with each other, while domestic research teams have not yet formed close ties. This lack of cooperative teams prevents the formation of complementary advantages, which is not conducive to the deepening of research methods and research perspectives, and to a certain extent will hinder the production of high-quality research results.

Compared with foreign countries, China’s adventure tourism development was late in forming, and the market penetration rate is low. However, by broadening the research population and research area to accelerate research on adventure tourism, through the development of natural resources for adventure tourism open pilots, the development of available water, airspace and other natural areas can be carried out for activities such as forest exploration, underwater adventure, rapids adventure, polar exploration, cave exploration and other forms of adventure tourism projects. Such efforts will further expand the development of the adventure tourism space in China.

3.3 Analysis of basic research areas

Through CiteSpace keyword network co-occurrence analysis, the keyword mapping of foreign research on adventure tourism research from 2000-2021 was obtained (Fig. 8), in which 392 keyword nodes and 742 keyword links are formed, and the overall network density is 0.0097. Usually, the larger network nodes and font size indicate a higher frequency of the keywords. There are not very many isolated nodes in the figure, and various nodes form network-like patterns of different sizes, indicating a strong correlation between keywords. Also from the adventure tourism research activity, various nodes keep appearing as time goes by, which indicates that adventure tourism research is dynamic.

Fig. 8 Mapping of foreign research keywords for adventure tourism research, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

Through the CiteSpace keyword network co-occurrence analysis and collated by Excel, the table of keyword frequency and centrality of foreign research on adventure tourism from 2000 to 2021 was obtained (Table 2), in which there are seven words with a keyword frequency greater than 30, which are adventure tourism, risk, tourism, experience, motivation, behavior and satisfaction. The centrality of these words is close to 0.1 or greater than 0.1, while four keywords (perception, model, recreation and impact) have a frequency greater than 20 and less than 30.

Table 2 Frequency and centrality of adventure tourism research keywords, 2000-2021 Serial number Keywords Frequency Centrality Earliest year 1 Adventure tourism 105 0.53 2001 2 Adventure tourism (Chinese) 74 1.64 2001 3 Risk 66 0.15 2002 4 Tourism 57 0.12 2008 5 Experience 56 0.16 2005 6 Motivation 36 0.13 2004 7 Behavior 35 0.12 2011 8 Satisfaction 32 0.11 2013 9 Perception 28 0.16 2015 10 Model 27 0.01 2011 11 Recreation 21 0.18 2011 12 Impact 21 0.16 2009 13 Travelers (Chinese) 9 0.35 2011 14 Risks (Chinese) 9 0.21 2007 15 Security management (Chinese) 8 0.06 2007 16 Question (Chinese) 7 0.15 2009 17 Development (Chinese) 6 0.23 2001 18 Countermeasures (Chinese) 6 0.32 2007 19 Current status (Chinese) 4 0.50 2001 20 Hainan (Chinese) 4 0.06 2010 21 Outdoor sports (Chinese) 3 0.15 2009

The CiteSpace keyword network co-occurrence analysis was used to obtain the Chinese research keyword mapping of adventure tourism research from 2000-2021 (Fig. 9). A total of 130 keyword nodes and 231 keyword links are formed, the overall network density is 0.0275, and usually the larger network nodes and font size indicate a higher frequency of the keywords. There are not very many isolated nodes in the figure, and various nodes form network-like patterns of varying sizes, indicating a strong correlation between keywords. Also in terms of adventure tourism research activity, various nodes keep appearing in the graph, which indicates that adventure tourism research is dynamic.

Fig. 9 Chinese adventure tourism research keywords map, 2000-2021

Full size|PPT slide

Through CiteSpace keyword network co-occurrence analysis and collated by Excel software, the table of keyword frequency and centrality of Chinese research on adventure tourism from 2000 to 2021 was obtained (Table 2). In that list, five keywords (adventure tourism, tourist, risk, safety management, and problem) have a keyword frequency greater than or equal to seven, and the centrality values of these words are also close to or greater than 0.1; and two words (development and countermeasures) have a keyword frequency greater than five and less than seven. Finally, three keywords have frequencies less than five, namely: current situation, Hainan and outdoor sports.

In summary, the keywords of adventure tourism research in China and abroad are strongly related to each other, and the research on adventure tourism is dynamic. However, the foreign research on adventure tourism takes the words “Adventure Tourism”, “Risk”, “Tourism” and other words as the central node, showing the characteristics of multi-point as the center to spread around, while the research on adventure tourism in Chinese takes “Adventure Tourism” as the central nodes, showing the characteristics of one point as the center to spread around. There is a cross section of research in China and abroad, with keywords such as “risk management”, “safety”, “New Zealand”, which is related to the characteristics of adventure tourism, and it is generally believed that adventure tourism always coexists with certain risks. Some scholars also often equate adventure with risk, and some scholars believe that the motivation of adventure tourism is to chase or experience risk, which is also the special nature of adventure tourism. Adventure tourism risk means that adventure tourism activities can lead to some accidents, and several scholars have conducted research on the high rate of adventure tourism activities and the various forms of accidents. New Zealand, the “adventure capital of the world”, is the first country to be studied in the literature, and much of this literature has examined the problems associated with adventure tourism in this region. In comparison, the foreign studies have more occurrences of words such as “motivation”, “experience”, and “satisfaction”, indicating that foreign scholars have focused their adventure tourism research on the perceptions of travelers and on market needs. The more frequent use of “development”, “response”, and “status quo” in domestic research indicate that the research on adventure tourism in China is still in the development phase. Compared with domestic research on adventure tourism, foreign research on adventure tourism is more practical and focused on market demand.

3.4 Analysis of phased frontier research areas

To a certain extent, the intensity of keyword emergence and emergence time help to identify the research hotspots in a certain period of time. The analysis by the CiteSpace software, of the keyword emergence network co-occurrence, with keyword emergence time of not less than 2 years as the search condition, yields the top 17 emergent keywords in foreign adventure tourism research from 2000-2021 (Table 3). This analysis found that the keyword emergent degree shows a strong regularity. First of all, there are 10 words with an emergence degree greater than two, which are “New Zealand”, “Climate change”, “Sensation seeking”, “Power”, “Destination image”, “National park”, “Ecotourism”, “Travel”, “Health”, and “Sustainable tourism” have values of 2.55, 2.17, 2.12, 2.10, 2.31, 2.09, 2.36, 2.62, 2.28 and 2.59 respectively. Secondly, the “Environment” is another keyword with a high emergence intensity of 1.97. The most emergent word is “Travel”, followed by “Sustainable Tourism” and “New Zealand”, then followed closely by “Ecotourism” and “Destination Image”.

Table 3 Top 17 emergent keywords in foreign research on adventure tourism, 2000-2021 Keywords Year Strength Begin End New Zealand 2000 2.55 2010 2013 Space tourism 2000 1.93 2010 2013 Character 2000 1.36 2010 2014 Climate change 2000 2.17 2011 2017 Sensation seeking 2000 2.12 2011 2016 Power 2000 2.10 2011 2013 Destination 2000 1.72 2012 2016 Attitude 2000 1.63 2012 2017 Destination image 2000 2.31 2013 2017 Intention 2000 1.54 2013 2017 National park 2000 2.09 2014 2016 Ecotourism 2000 2.36 2015 2017 Environment 2000 1.97 2016 2018 Rock climbing 2000 1.58 2016 2018 Travel 2000 2.62 2017 2020 Health 2000 2.28 2018 2021 Sustainable tourism 2000 2.59 2019 2021

The intensity of keyword emergence and emergence time are helpful for identifying the research hotspots in a certain period of time to a certain extent. The CiteSpace keyword emergence network co-occurrence analysis, with the keyword emergence time of not less than 2 years as the search condition, was used to obtain the top 17 emergent keyword mapping of Chinese adventure tourism research from 2000-2021 (Table 4). This analysis found that the keyword emergence degree showed a certain amount of regularity. Firstly, there are two terms with an emergence degree greater than two, namely “Safety management” and “Risk”, which are as high as 2.68 and 2.4, and starting and ending from 2007-2010 and 2007-2010. The keyword with the highest emergence intensity is “Safety management”, followed by “Risk”, “Tourist”, then followed by “Backpack travel” and “Travel motivation”.

Table 4 Top 17 emergent keywords for Chinese adventure tourism research, 2000-2021 Keywords Year Strength Begin End Safety management 2000 2.68 2007 2010 Risk 2000 2.40 2007 2010 Changbai Mountain 2000 0.94 2008 2010 Question 2000 0.84 2009 2010 Qinhuangdao 2000 0.82 2009 2011 Outdoor travel 2000 0.82 2009 2011 Hainan 2000 1.00 2010 2012 Countermeasures 2000 0.86 2010 2011 Status quo 2000 0.57 2010 2011 Feasibility 2000 0.94 2011 2013 Develop 2000 0.75 2011 2013 New Zealand 2000 1.18 2014 2015 Backpack travel 2000 1.18 2014 2015 Changsha 2000 1.03 2015 2016 Travel motivation 2000 1.03 2015 2016 Rescue system 2000 0.82 2016 2019 Tourist 2000 1.61 2018 2021

The keywords of adventure tourism research abroad are broad and intense; From the emergent time nodes, the most persistent words are “Climate Change”, “Sensation Seeking”and “Sustainable Tourism”, and the literature shows that climate warming has an important impact on the choice of adventure tourism destinations. The probability of landslides has increased dramatically (Fu, 2007) and for regions where snow and ice are used to develop local ice and snow projects, the tourism season will be dramatically shortened (Wang et al., 2012). The pursuit of excitement is an important element of participation in adventure tourism, and studies have found that people interested in a high degree of excitement and adventure will pursue exciting and adventurous sports activities (Belley-Ranger et al., 2021), such as skydiving, bungee jumping, paragliding and other activities. The keywords in foreign research on adventure tourism from 2015 onwards focus on “Ecotourism”, “Environment”, “Sustainable Tourism” and other keywords related to the environment, indicating that the hot research on adventure tourism abroad is focused on environmental protection, and adventure eco-tourism has become a new tourism model.

The keywords of adventure tourism research in China have a wide range of contents, but the intensity is generally low. From the emergent time nodes, the longest durations are for “Safety management”, “Risk”, “Rescue system” and “Tourist”. Based on a review of the literature, safety accidents occurred frequently in adventure tourism at home and abroad in 2006, and the number of deaths caused by participation in adventure tourism in China reached 23 in that whole year. In rock climbing accidents that occurred in Yangmantai, Tiger Mountain, Helan Mountain and other places, three people died due to getting lost in the Kubqi Desert, and four people were killed in an avalanche in the Alps. The United Nations Environment and Disaster Reduction Agency (ISDEA), the International Risk Management Council (IRGC) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OCED) are among the international and national institutions that have paid attention to the research and practice of risk assessment. The State Council formulated the National Medium and Long-Term Science and Technology Development Plan Outline (2006-2020) in 2006, in which risk assessment and safety management are listed as important topics for future science and technology development in China, which has prompted domestic scholars to strengthen their research on risk management. Secondly, in recent years, the number of domestic tourists in China has been rising and the total tourism revenue has been reaching record highs. The expedited development of the domestic tourism industry has resulted in serious homogenization of tourism products, an insufficient supply of high-quality products and lagging new industry products, which is contrary to the diversified needs of tourists. In order to solve this contradiction, the State Council issued the “General Office of the State Council on the guidance of promoting the development of all-area tourism”, which greatly promoted the tourist as a new hot study topic.

In summary, in foreign adventure tourism, the concepts of ecotourism, outdoor recreation and park management literature are mentioned in large numbers, the commercialization of adventure tourism activities has matured gradually, and the current research focus is on ecotourism. In contrast, adventure tourism in China is still a relatively new tourism product, with adventure tourism activities in 1998 occurring before the initial formation of a reasonable scale, so adventure tourism research in China is still in its infancy (Ding et al., 2021), the study of adventure tourism is not as comprehensive and in-depth. Due to the policy influence, Chinese adventure tourism research is currently focus in tourists.

4 Discussion and conclusions

4.1 Discussion

(1) In terms of research trends, the adventure tourism literature published in foreign languages in 2000-2015 showed an overall fluctuating upward trend, and in 2015-2021 it showed a fluctuating downward trend. Adventure tourism literature published in the Chinese language in 2000-2006 shown a rapid upward trend, and in 2006-2021 it showed a fluctuating downward trend. Both Chinese and foreign literature in 2006-2007 were rapidly increasing. There were many adventure tourism accidents at home and abroad in 2006, such as the disappearance and deaths of three people in the Hobq Desert in China (Li, 2007), and the avalanche in the Alps (Lu, 2007) that killed four people, and these accidents caused a great social impact, which greatly affected the research on adventure tourism at home and abroad. At the same time, the adventure tourism market has shrunk considerably under the spread of the new global pandemic, so the related enterprises engaged in adventure tourism are struggling to survive, and adventure tourism research has also shown a significant decline in the background of the epidemic. China’s adventure tourism research had a strong initial momentum but insufficient momentum more recently, and China needs to learn from the advanced research experience abroad to explore new research directions and research paths (Yin and Qiu, 2021).

(2) In terms of research power, foreign adventure tourism research scholars and research institutions have formed close ties with each other, while domestic research teams with close ties have not yet formed. This lack of cooperative institutions prevents the formation of complementary advantages, which is not conducive to the deepening of research methods and research perspectives, and to a certain extent will hinder the production of high-quality research results. From the perspective of tourism development, adventure tourism in foreign countries has entered a mature stage of consolidation, allowing adventure tourism activities to form a diversified form, organization and management of professional security system characteristics. Meanwhile, adventure tourism in China is still a relatively new tourism product, and adventure tourism activities began to form a certain scale in 1998, so adventure tourism research in China is still in its infancy and the study of adventure tourism is not yet comprehensive and in-depth. Research in foreign countries has developed through interdisciplinary cross-fertilization, and relatively scientific and systematic research methods have formed through the construction of large cooperative networks. Psychological methods (Gilchrist et al., 1995), legal methods (Callander and Page, 2003), comparative analysis (Page et al., 2005) and other multi-disciplinary research methods are involved. In contrast, domestic research is limited to tourism management institutes and geography institutes, so the methods of economics (Ren et al., 2007; Zhang, 2007) and geography (Song et al., 2009) occupy a large proportion of domestic adventure tourism research methods, which are relatively singular and simple.

(3) In terms of research geography, the foreign literature research is concentrated in North America and Europe, which is due to the fact that adventure tourism was developed in Europe and America in the 19th century and developed rapidly after the World War II. Its and its development in North America and Europe has a long history and involves various forms of adventure activities, which facilitates the research of adventure tourism. Beijing, as the political, economic, and cultural center of China, has the largest number of universities and research institutions in China, and it also has abundant adventure tourism resources, and adventure tourism activities such as mountaineering, hiking, rock climbing, and skiing are popular among tourists. The Yangtze River Delta region, represented by Jiangsu and Zhejiang, is the fastest growing and largest economic region in China. It has tourism revenue reaching 4 trillion yuan a year, accounting for about 9% of the global tourism revenue, and tourism is the characteristic industry of the Yangtze River Delta region. Guizhou, Yunnan, Chongqing and other southwestern regions have developed unique mountain tourism resources due to their unique landscapes, and have hosted such large international events as the Asian Canoe Slalom Championships, the International Mountain Bike Classic, and the Rock Climbing Natural Rock Wall Series Finals, among others. The organization of these outdoor activities has enriched and promoted the process of adventure tourism diversification, and greatly promoted the strengthening of research on adventure tourism in the southwestern region.

(4) In terms of research content, there is a cross-section in domestic and foreign research content, such as “Risk management”, “Tourism motivation”, “Tourism motivation” and “New Zealand”. Adventure tourism is generally considered to always coexist with certain risks, and some scholars also often equate adventure with risk (Miles, 1978). Some scholars believe that the motivation of adventure tourism is to chase or experience risk (Ewert, 1991), which is where the particularity of adventure tourism lies. Adventure tourism risk means that adventure tourism activities can lead to some accidents, and several scholars have conducted some research on the high rate of accidents and the forms of accidents that occur in adventure tourism activities. Many adventure tourism activities are highly dependent on underdeveloped regions with good natural environments. New Zealand, known as the “adventure capital of the world” in the Queenstown area, was the first country in the literature to study adventure tourism in this region (Cloke and Perkins, 1998; Malcolm, 2001; Callander and Page, 2003). Adventure tourism is discussed extensively in the literature of ecotourism, outdoor recreation and park management, and adventure tourism activities are becoming commercially mature, with the current research focusing on ecotourism. Compared with domestic adventure tourism research, foreign research on adventure tourism is more practical and focused on market demand.

This study visualized the adventure tourism research literature in terms of author cooperation networks, institutional cooperation networks, keyword frequency, and keyword emergence in the Chinese and foreign literature through CiteSpace software. It also visualized the geospatial distribution of domestic research institutions through ArcGIS, and provided suggestions for adventure tourism research in China in terms of research systems, research disciplines, and research centers. However, due to the wide range of foreign research institutions, the geospatial distribution of foreign research institutions was not visualized.

4.2 Conclusions

(1) To build a scientific and reasonable theoretical system of adventure tourism. Adventure tourism relies on different countries and cultural backgrounds, and even different people, showing different scopes, degrees and forms. There is still confusion about the terminology, basic concepts and theoretical aspects of adventure tourism, so China should learn from the advanced experience of foreign research, combined with the actual research needs of the country. This approach can provide a basis for promoting the development of adventure tourism by studying foreign scholars to build large and close research teams, strengthening exchanges between scholars, and conducting research on the elements of adventure tourism with the cross-fertilization of ideas from tourism, ecology, geography and other disciplines.

(2) Strengthen the interdisciplinary research of adventure tourism. Compared with the study of adventure tourism abroad, China’s adventure tourism research methods are relatively singualr and simple. The exchanges between scholars can be strengthened by studying foreign scholars and building large and close research teams that can provide a basis for promoting the development of adventure tourism by carrying out research on the elements of adventure tourism with the cross-fertilization of ideas from tourism, ecology, geography and other disciplines.

(3) Strengthen weak research areas and expand brand new research areas. Domestic adventure tourism research is mainly descriptive research, with less in-depth research on adventure tourism, such as on adventure tourism development, adventure tourism areas, risk control and safety, adventure tourism marketing, adventure tourism clubs and other topics. In addition to adventure tourism safety issues which have been relatively thoroughly researched, other area of study are still relatively shallow, and China needs to strengthen the existing weak research areas. In addition, adventure tourism involves a wide range of complex content and some research areas have not yet attracted the attention of researchers, such as the sustainable development of adventure tourism sites. Adventure tourism research needs to continue to expand these research areas, using and deepening the traditional tourism research content while at the same time drawing on the concepts, theories and methods of related disciplines, to produce multi-level, multi-faceted research.

(4) Broaden the research population and research territory. At present, China’s adventure tourism research institutions are only concentrated in Beijing, the Yangtze River Delta region, the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau region, while other regions have less research volume. Compared with foreign countries, China’s adventure tourism development began late and the market penetration rate is low, but it could be improved through the development of natural resources into adventure tourism open pilots. In addition, the development of available water, airspace and other natural areas can be carried out for the expansion of certain activities, such as forest exploration, underwater adventures, rapids adventures, polar exploration, cave exploration and other forms of adventure tourism projects, to further expand the development of the adventure tourism space.

(5) Pay attention to the research of adventure tourism that focuses on project tourism. The key to adventure sports is the project and the key to tourism is the market. Compared to domestic research, foreign research on adventure tourism is more practical, focusing on market demand. China needs to grasp the availability of resources, through China’s new urbanization, regional integration and a series of national strategies such as Belt and Road to provide opportunities for adventure tourism spatial scale expansion and summarize the experience of adventure tourism with Chinese characteristics. In the northwest, southwest, northeast, coastal and other regions, various areas are suitable for adventure tourism activities in different forms, such as alpine trekking, desert adventure, ancient silk road adventure, grassland adventure, natural ecological tourism, and humanities scientific research tourism. Research work on adventure tourism with Chinese characteristics could be carried out in such places in order to promote the extension of the connotation of adventure tourism and enhance the science and influence of adventure tourism.

{{custom_sec.title}}

=2" class="main_content_center_left_zhengwen_bao_erji_title main_content_center_left_one_title" style="font-size: 16px;">{{custom_sec.title}}{{custom_sec.content}}

网址：近20年来中外探险旅游研究进展的可视化对比分析 https://klqsh.com/news/view/128350

相关内容

浅析探险旅游发展现状及对策
旅游体验中的情感与情感研究：现状与进展
户外探险旅游
中国旅游研究院报告：情绪价值逐渐成为旅游者重要需求
影视分析角度及方法研究报告.docx
探索纽约旅游和探险展：全球旅行的无限可能
2022中国探险产业白皮书：探险产业规模持续扩张，市场活力稳中有升 CHINA ADVENTURE ASSOCIATION
美国洛杉矶旅游和探险展开幕 中国“春节文化”和“冰雪旅游”成亮点
探险旅游热潮席卷全球 市场增长与趋势展望
【文旅研究】文化旅游的关键不是文化，而是文化体验

随便看看