This article draws on five participatory action research studies to address how geomedia theory can induce multiple imaginations of the future. Critical future research advocates that societies need to collectively create visions of multiple futures, transcending the single rational (neoliberal) future path. The studies were conducted in collaboration with rural communities and local tourism entrepreneurs who were exploring geomedia technologies to develop destinations. The tourism sector uses geomedia technologies but often depends on commercial platforms that seek upscaling and generalisation, becoming detached from local practices and place-specific settings. By applying critical geomedia studies, we problematised the relationship between people, place, and technology in the present, the past, and the future. Geomedia studies provided a critical lens that provoked future visions beyond preformatted technological infrastructures and media practices. The participants were asked to engage with complex issues such as access, restrictions, equality, authority, and legitimacy in relation to the specific place, bringing forth a multitude of local assets and narratives envisioning alternative geomedia technologies. As a result of this process, participants paid greater attention to local assets, gained a more critical approach towards technology, and dared to use digital solutions in a more visionary manner. We, therefore, argue that researchers need to engage with society to bypass hegemonic geomedia representations. By illustrating how geomedia theory can be utilised within community development, we provide a framework for how collaborative research can more explicitly engage with local actors’ thoughts and imaginings of possible futures.

This special issue of Culture Unbound directs attention beyond cities, to small towns and rural communities, and the practices taking place there. Referring to a previous special issue on ‘Rural Media Spaces’ from 2010, this special issue revisits the notion of ‘the rural’ versus ‘the urban’ through the concept of placemaking and geomedia. In a mediatized society, placemaking practices cannot be understood without simultaneously understanding different media practices and how they affect place. A geomedia perspective on placemaking beyond cities, therefore, brings new perspectives on media representations of small towns and rural communities, related to the materialization of space and how we engage with and perceive the world. Geomedia also includes a focus on layers of digitalization and new media in the relations between place and practice.

The issue brings together researchers from a wide range of subjects, and the articles in this volume address empirical examples from different rural places and small towns in Sweden and internationally. Taken together, a manifold of issues relating to media and placemaking beyond cities are covered, for example, inclusion/exclusion, representation, resistance, community building, belonging, and identification.

The role of religion in Western societies has gained renewed attention in recent years. While choirs have been studied to varying extents in the social sciences, the geography of choirs has received little attention, particularly in human geography. Using questionnaire responses from secular choir members, this exploratory study examines the possible differences and/or similarities of secular choir’s sacral and/or secular activity in urban and rural spaces in Sweden. The study reveals two primary findings. First, it reveals that secular choir members engage in a mixture of secular and sacred activities, suggesting that these activities can be considered postsecular. Second, the data challenges the geographical perception of rural environments as more sacred/traditional, as they have a high proportion of secular activities. Likewise, the results questions the geographical perception of urban environments as secular/modern, as they demonstrate an even distribution of sacred activities.

Tourism digitalization is often understood and implemented in a technocratic sense and implicitly viewed as a solution to perceived shortages in tourism development. Despite this, little attention has been given to the fact that digital technology has spatial and social implications and is strongly intertwined with tourism places and various actors. We address this intending to identify the dominant disciplinary and contemporary research approaches to tourism digitalization through a systematic review of 2 480 publications from the Scopus database. With inspiration from geomedia studies, an explorative thematic analysis found a separation that poses a risk of technology development being detached from its actual context, suggesting that tourism scholars and practitioners would benefit from broadening their readings and critically addressing the interconnection between technology and tourism places. 

With the rapidly emerging development of technology-mediated tourism experiences and place-based digital services for visitors, there is a lack of awareness regarding the spatial implications of technological implementations. Based on a participatory action research method applied in this study on five research-based destination development projects in Sweden, we propose a spatially sensible approach when developing enhanced experiences for visitors through digital technology. This paper is motivated by the emerging criticism of how media technology is shaping and reshaping spaces. Drawing on the theoretical underpinnings of the growing field of geomedia studies, we propose “geomedia sensibility” as a way to offer a sensible approach in the co-creation of digital experiences at destinations.

Introduction

The aim of our research is to contribute with methods for rural sustainable tourism and community development. The work also entails identifying solutions encompassed for local actors in rural settings, thereby strengthening stakeholders and contributing to sustainable, resilient and attractive rural communities.

Our current research project ‘Smart Villages in Sweden’ is evolving a development process, resulting in ideas, concepts and prototypes for local solutions that addresses local challenges, using the concept of ‘Smart Villages’ as a focal point. We are using a place-based approach for innovation in a broader context with the result of developing services or solutions adapted to suit rural communities. We argue that developing such a process is vital for a sustainable and long-term durable outcome, as it ensures that the ideas, concepts and prototypes produced are based on the local communities’ situation. This is in line with EU´s concept of Smart Villages (2019) which refers to communities in rural areas revitalising rural services and improving resilience using innovative solutions.  

We are using a participatory approach developed during several years of previous research, albeit in a wider sense where tourism development is put in the context of a general notion of sustainable community development. Two communities and the surrounding countryside in the county of Värmland, Sillerud and Sysslebäck, are our cases in this project. This year, we are carrying out the second work package of the project, which involves a method where various community stakeholders from our local cases are involved. Using this approach entails both challenges and opportunities. During this session we would like to discuss our results and experiences so far.  

Theoretical framework

In this project, we are starting from the theories of service ecosystems and the transformative service approach, as this is in line with the concept of smart villages. Service ecosystems are defined as a network-based collection of actors that work together to create and deliver value to customers. It can include companies, customers, suppliers, governments, and other stakeholders who collaborate and interact in various ways to create and deliver value (Akaka et. al., 2012). The theory of the Transformative Service Approach is about companies and organizations not only delivering products and services, but also having a broader role in society by contributing to creating positive changes and transformations in customers and society in general (Andersson et. al., 2013). Important aspects of these two approaches are that they focus on the dynamics between different actors in an ecosystem and how it affects the creation and delivery of value over time. This means that the ecosystem is in constant change and development through interactions and transactions between the actors.

The Smart Villages concept is based on the idea that value is determined uniquely by and together with actors linked to the specific location (Cāne, 2021), and understanding the context of value creation is the key to successful service offerings. The methodology within the smart villages concept involves a bottom-up, collaborative approach that aims to produce both practical results and scientific results. Overall, the research highlights the importance of engaging with rural communities and stakeholders in the process of understanding and promoting smart villages (Aziiza & Susanto, 2020). Important to note is that what makes a local community ‘smart’ is not limited to increased levels of digitisation or connectivity. ‘Smartness’ stems from the use of digital technologies as vehicles for local development goals and the improvement of the quality of life of citizens (Smart Villages briefing note, 2019). ‘Smart’ does not automatically mean sustainable; producing and using new technology in itself have effects on the environment, for example. In this project it is therefore important that we focus on ‘smart’ solutions that will contribute to economic and social sustainability in terms of vibrant rural business and communities.

Methodology

In our research, we take a participatory approach (Trischler et al, 2018), where we use a place-based method, focusing on bottom-up perspective and a collaborative, creative way of working together with the aim of producing both practical outcomes as well as scientific results and knowledge (Ryan Bengtsson et al, 2022). This method has been formed over seven years of research in close collaboration with businesses and organisations and is influenced by research actively engaging actors (see for example Haraway, 2016 and Ren & Jóhannesson, 2017). The method used is divided into three steps where the collaborative process can be viewed as a ladder, each step forming the base for the next. Knowledge and new perspectives create an input into the next step.  

In our ongoing project, the method consists of the following three steps: an inventory, a mapping process and evaluation phase. So far, we are coming towards an end of the second step. The first step involved gathering vital information about the two local communities that serve as cases in this research. This information has given us as input into the following steps of the collaborative process. The two main sources of information in the first stage were qualitative interviews with key actors in our local communities and quantitative visitor surveys. The second part of the method involved working with stakeholders in the local communities in a series of workshops led by the research team. The participants have been co-creating ideas and solutions on how to increase the competitiveness as well as quality of life in their communities. The third step will involve collaborative testing and evaluating the most viable of the creative ideas and solutions.  

Results

As mentioned, the research project Smart Villages grows out of, and further develops our research on participatory processes in community and destination development. At this conference, we will present our recent findings in terms of methodological challenges and opportunities, as well as the practical and analytical outcomes so far.

Methodological findings indicate that an adaptive approach when defining local stakeholders is vital, as the local context varies, and each community encompass a unique mix of stakeholders. Therefore, the importance of gathering information of the place and its actors is essential in the initial stages of the process. Furthermore, we argue for the importance of involving local key actors at an early stage in the process. This is a necessary empowering factor, which will increase the changes of local ownership of the process and the practical results.

Practical outcomes include for example the start-up of a local group in one of the cases, taking on a local ownership, with the aim of strengthening this rather fragmented and divided community. By facilitating contact between students and community key actors from our other case, they have been provided with new ideas to implement.

Analytical outputs involve for example categorising opportunities put forward by the local stakeholders. These can be divided into three main types of actions for strengthening the places’ competitiveness:

1)       information about existing local attractions and events (tangible)

2)       storytelling about the local culture and collaboration (intangible)

3)       improvement of existing service and visitor experience (for residents, visitors, and part-time visitors)

Our findings also imply the need for further research into the combination of digital and physical solutions when it comes to sustainable community and destination development. Our participants often suggest digital solutions as a tool of drawing attention to physical meetings. Many ideas put forward are based on a social need to meet, often across group boundaries such as those between residents and visitors. If implemented, this could increase positive social effects of tourism and reduce opposition against tourism growth.  

References

Akaka, M. A., Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2012). An exploration of networks in value cocreation: A serviceecosystems view. Review of Marketing Research, 9, 13–5.

Anderson, L., Ostrom, A. L., Corus, C., Fisk, R. P., Gallan, A. S., Giraldo, M., ... & Williams, J. D. (2013). Transformative service research: An agenda for the future. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1203-1210. 

Aziiza, A. A., & Susanto, T. D. (2020). The Smart Village Model for Rural Area (Case Study: Banyuwangi Regency). In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 722, No. 1, p. 012011). IOP Publishing.

Cāne, R. (2021, June). Development of smart villages as a factor for rural digital transformation. In ENVIRONMENT. TECHNOLOGIES. RESOURCES. Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference (Vol. 1, pp. 43-49).

Haraway, D.J. (2016) Staying with the Trouble - Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press

Ren, C., van der Duim, R., & Jóhannesson, T. (2017). Co-creation of tourism knowledge. in Ren, C., Jóhannesson, T., & van der Duim, R. (Ed.) Co-creating tourism research - Towards collaborative ways of knowing. London & New York: Routledge.

Ryan Bengtsson, L., Braunerhielm, L., Gibson, L., Hoppstadius, F. & Kingsepp, E. (2022). Digital media innovations through participatory action research. Interventions for digital place-based experiences. Nordicom, 43 (2), 134 - 151

Smart Villages Pilot Project Briefing Note (2019) https://digitevent-images.s3.amazonaws.com/5c0e6198801d2065233ff996-registrationfiletexteditor1551115459927-smart-villages-briefing-note.pdf

Trischler, J., Pervan, S. J., Kelly, S. J., & Scott, D. R. (2018). The value of codesign: The effect of customer involvement in service design teams. Journal of Service Research, 21(1), 75-100.

This article presents an action-research study investigating a spatially sensitive innovation process of place-based experiences in a rural area of Sweden. Lately, there have been a growing number of initiatives focused on developing location-aware mobile media – geomedia technologies – to offer place-based digital experiences within tourism. Drawing on contemporary critical studies on geomedia technologies, we stress the importance of reflecting upon the implications of place-based technologies to minimise both the negative impacts on a place and the neglect of local perspectives. We conducted action-research interventions to unpack the complexity of developing place-based mediated experiences. The study makes an illustrative case of how interventions lead to more nuanced development processes of geomedia technologies while simultaneously fostering creativity. We argue that as action research allows researchers to intervene in media innovations, it identifies models for more nuanced place-based development processes, including local spatial and sociocultural perspectives.

Introduction

There is a need for digital innovation initiatives in rural areas, where rural development has been marginalised in favor of urban development (see for example Cowie et al., 2020; Pant etal., 2017). By combining tourism research on digital innovation in rural areas (Braunerhielm etal. 2019; 2018; Ryan Bengtsson et al, 2022) with service design (Vink et al., 2020), and value-creating processes (Nöjd et al. 2020), the aim of our research is to contribute with methods for rural sustainable tourism and community development and identify solutions encompassed for businesses in rural settings. Therefore, we contribute with ways of conducting participatory research- and innovation processes, focusing on places as both destinations and local communities. Our current research project is using a participatory approach developed during several years of previous research, albeit in a wider sense where tourism development is put in the context of a general notion of sustainable rural development. The purpose of our recent project ‘Smart Villages’, is to gain increased knowledge and understanding of how smart solutions can address some of the challenges in rural Sweden. Our general research question is: How can ‘Smart Villages’ be used as a concept to overcome challenges and support sustainable communities?