Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Survey-Of-The-Doctoral-Theses-Accepte 👈

1. This article was downloaded by: [Dr Galal M. H. Afifi]
On: 07 May 2013, At: 11:44
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uhat20
A Survey of Doctoral Theses Accepted by Universities
in the United Kingdom and Ireland for Studies Related
to Tourism, 2000–2009
Galal M. H. Afifi PhD
a
a
Department of Tourism, Sultan Qaboos University
To cite this article: Galal M. H. Afifi PhD (2013): A Survey of Doctoral Theses Accepted by Universities in the United Kingdom
and Ireland for Studies Related to Tourism, 2000–2009, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 25:1, 29-39
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2013.777587
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

2. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 25: 29–39, 2013
Copyright © The International Council on Hotel, Restaurant, and Institutional Education
ISSN: 1096-3758 print / 2325-6540 online
DOI: 10.1080/10963758.2013.777587
A Survey of Doctoral Theses Accepted by Universities in the United
Kingdom and Ireland for Studies Related to Tourism, 2000–2009
Galal M. H. Afifi, PhD
Department of Tourism, Sultan Qaboos University
Measured up against other areas of tourism research, modest effort has been made in research-
ing tourism education generally and tourism postgraduate studies particularly (G. Afifi, 2009).
The purpose of this article is to update D. Botterill, C. Haven, and T. Gale’s (2002) research
titled “A Survey of Doctoral Theses Accepted by Universities in the UK and Ireland for
Studies Related to Tourism, 1990–1999.” Accordingly, this research investigates the doctoral
theses accepted by universities in the United Kingdom and Ireland between 2000 and 2009.
The research starts by demonstrating the previous work related to tourism postgraduate stud-
ies to identify trends and disclose associated issues. Subsequently, the research illustrates the
methodological approach utilized before providing an analysis of both chronological and geo-
graphical distributions of tourism PhD theses awarded in the United Kingdom and Ireland.
The research also sheds light as well on the most attractive and relatively neglected areas of
tourism PhDs, which might be of a special importance for universities working on setting their
PhD plans.
Keywords: tourism education, PhD theses, postgraduate research, United Kingdom and Ireland
INTRODUCTION
As tourism plays an important role in the sociocultural and
economic life of many countries (Harrison, 2001; World
Tourism Organization, 2002), “tourism education at all lev-
els plays a key role in securing and maintaining sustainable
tourism development” (Okumus & Yagci, 2006, p. 90).
In this context, several researchers believe that the rapid
growth of the tourism industry has led to a chain of con-
sequences regarding both tourism education and tourism
research (see Figure 1). For instance, Tribe (1997), Airey and
Johnson (1998), and Stuart (2002) asserted that the growth
of the tourism industry has definitely inspired the expan-
sion of studying tourism, which could be remarked along
with the increase in the number of both tourism scholars and
academic institutions providing tourism programs at under-
graduate and postgraduate levels. Botterill, Haven, and Gale
(2002) then claimed that this expansion of interest in tourism
studies has consequently led to a plethora of tourism-related
Correspondence should be addressed to Galal M. H. Afifi, PhD,
Department of Tourism, Sultan Qaboos University, PO Box Al Khoud 42,
Muscat, Oman. E-mail: galal_afifi@yahoo.com
texts, journals, and conferences over the past three decades.
Dale and Robinson (2001) believe that this has also resulted
in the enhancement of research on both the provision and
content of tourism education, which can be evidenced in
the escalating number of related studies in countries like
the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and even
developing states such as Egypt (e.g., Afifi, 2009, 2010)
and Turkey (e.g., Okumus & Yagci, 2006). Yet the overall
amount of research on tourism postgraduate studies is rel-
atively low, especially on the eastern side of the Atlantic
(Botterill et al., 2002).
The study of the tourism phenomenon is a relatively new
addition to the worldwide academic endeavor, as it emerged
late in the 20th century within a diverse range of disci-
plines (Echtner & Jamal, 1997). In the United Kingdom,
tourism higher education evolved dramatically over the past
40 years. Botterill et al. (2002) recorded that tourism stud-
ies emerged in the early 1970s, mainly within the disci-
plines of geography and economics. From the mid-1980s
it could also be found in other social sciences and humani-
ties disciplines, particularly anthropology. However, such an
amalgamated situation changed gradually, mostly because
of the incremental development of the tourism industry,
which supported the growth and independence of tourism
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

3. 30 AFIFI
E.g., increase in the number of students and
academic institutions providing both
undergraduate and postgraduate programs
Expansion
in studying
tourism
Growth in
tourism
industry
Expansion
in tourism
education
research
A plethora
of texts,
journals &
conferences
E.g., considerable tourism research
conducted in different countries
FIGURE 1 Growth of the tourism industry and the chain of consequences regarding both tourism education and tourism research.
education. The Learning and Teaching Support Network
for Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism (LTSN; 2002)
believes that major progress occurred in the United Kingdom
in the late 1990s, as it spotted a 142% increase in the num-
ber of tourism independent programs from 31 in 1996 to
75 in 2000. Nowadays, the annual demand of approxi-
mately 12,000 undergraduate and postgraduate students—in
tourism, hospitality, leisure, and sport disciplines—is the
main incentive for creating distinct departmental structures
and a growing tourism studies academy in UK higher edu-
cational entities. Recent statistics show that in 2001 the
aforementioned four disciplines combined totaled about
50,000 students and 1,600 staff in the United Kingdom
(LTSN, 2002), which surely helped transform tourism
studies into a more mature and independent educational
discipline.
However, similar to the commencement of undergraduate
education, tourism postgraduate studies started in the United
Kingdom in the mid-1960s with researchers coming from
other education disciplines. At that time, the submission of
a doctoral thesis was allowed based largely on published
work, in contrast to the conventional route in which candi-
dates who have followed an approved program of supervised
research submit a thesis that rarely, and certainly not compul-
sorily, contains published work (Wilson, 2002). “It was then
the subsequent growth in undergraduate students of tourism
and the formation of academic [independent] departments to
support that provision that enabled an increase in postgrad-
uate provision” (Botterill & Gale, 2005, p. 470). Nowadays,
several trends can be noticed regarding tourism postgradu-
ate education in the United Kingdom. The first trend is the
significant contribution of international students—especially
those from developing countries—who are registered in the
United Kingdom. By the mid-1970s, a small number of
international postgraduate students began arriving in the
United Kingdom to study tourism. By 2000, it was esti-
mated that approximately 1,000 postgraduate students were
studying tourism in the United Kingdom (Botterill & Gale,
2005). Such a trend is definitely affecting several major
issues, such as topic selection and PhD application. A second
trend is the independence of tourism postgraduate programs.
As mentioned before, in earlier years, postgraduate stu-
dents were coming from other disciplines. Now, tourism
PhD programs are mostly independent and tourism post-
graduate students are coming mainly from pure tourism
backgrounds (Goeldner, 2001). Almost the same pattern of
development, independence, and growth can be observed
in other destinations such as the United States (Jafari &
Aaser, 1988; Meyer-Arendt, 2000; Meyer-Arendt & Justice,
2002), Australia (Hall, 1991), and North America (Goeldner,
2001).
Accordingly, it can be concluded that higher educa-
tional entities commonly have “two main roles: creating
knowledge and disseminating knowledge. Research has
been the main vehicle for creating knowledge and . . .
[education] has been the main vehicle for disseminating
knowledge” (Shahalizadeh, Amirjamshidi, & Shahalizadeh,
2009, p. 104). Consequently, tourism education researchers
are typically invited to cover two central areas: under-
graduate education as well as postgraduate education
and research. In this context, several researchers (e.g.,
Amoah & Baum, 1997; Barrows & Bosselman, 1999;
Christou, 1999; Cooper, Scales, & Westlake, 1992; Dale
& Robinson, 2001; Knowles, Teixeira, & Egan, 2003;
Sigala & Baum, 2003) assume that there are a substan-
tial number of studies on tourism undergraduate education.
On the contrary, examining postgraduate issues (e.g., mas-
ter’s, PhDs) seems relatively outside tourism researchers’
focal interest. In their pioneer article titled “Tourism as
the Subject of Doctoral Dissertations,” Jafari and Aaser
(1988) called other researchers to replicate their study
in other countries, which inspired several researchers to
respond (e.g., Afifi, 2009; Botterill et al., 2002; Hall,
1991; Meyer-Arendt, 2000; Meyer-Arendt & Justice, 2002).
Yet more research is still required, mainly to exceed the
level of just scanning or surveying PhDs to analyzing
them aiming to answer more related questions such as
by whom, where, when, and why PhDs are conducted.
To address part of this deficit in the research, this article is
presented.
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

4. SURVEY OF DOCTORAL THESES 31
RESEARCH AIM
The present article is supplementary research to a study done
by Botterill et al. (2002) titled “A Survey of Doctoral Theses
Accepted by Universities in the UK and Ireland for Studies
Related to Tourism, 1990–1999,” in which they provide a
comprehensive review and analysis of tourism PhD the-
ses conducted in the United Kingdom and Ireland between
1990 and 1999. Accordingly, this research aims to complete
Botterill et al.’s work by demonstrating and analyzing the
tourism doctoral theses accepted between 2000 and 2009.
In this context, the research intends to draw a chronolog-
ical and geographical map of the theses awarded as well
as identify major trends in tourism PhDs, which should
help recognize both the most attractive and the relatively
neglected areas of tourism PhDs in the United Kingdom
and Ireland. Thus, this research may be significant for dif-
ferent stakeholders: first, UK and Irish universities, which
may receive this research as an indicator to understand their
locations on the tourism postgraduate education map; sec-
ond, planners of tourism education who need to have an
overview of the trends and gaps in tourism postgraduate
education in the United Kingdom and Ireland; third, inter-
national researchers, who can use the UK and Ireland model
as a benchmark when studying tourism PhDs in their coun-
tries; and finally, postgraduate students who want to have a
broader view of the possibilities of conducting future tourism
theses.
METHODOLOGY
Resembling earlier studies done on mapping tourism post-
graduate research (e.g., Afifi, 2009; Hall, 1991; Jafari &
Aaser, 1988; Meyer-Arendt & Justice, 2002; Pizam &
Chacko, 1982), content analysis of assorted relevant doc-
uments was used as the method of data collection in this
study. Thus, following the methodological approach applied
in Botterill et al.’s (2002) research, the data reported in the
present study were drawn from a single source, the online
Index to Theses (i.e., http://www.theses.com), covering the-
ses accepted in the United Kingdom and Ireland from 1970 to
2009. This study focused on tourism PhD and DPhil the-
ses accepted between 2000 and 2009. Information recorded
in the Index is voluntarily returned to the compilers of the
Index by contributing universities of the United Kingdom
and Ireland (the responsibility for which rests with the prin-
cipal libraries of these institutions). The Index is updated
regularly (Botterill et al., 2002). Each entry in the Index
(a separate Web page for each thesis) includes the title of
the thesis, the author’s name, the awarding university, the
level of award, the academic discipline, the British Library
reference, and a full-script abstract.
In order to identify relevant theses, numerous online
searches were undertaken during the period between April
7 and April 15, 2011. Then an updating search was done
on June 30, 2011, to ensure that the study considered
all related theses that had been registered until the end
of December 2009, assuming that it may require between
12 and 18 months for an accepted thesis to be registered in
the Index. I searched the Index for thesis abstracts that con-
tained the same nine key words identified by Botterill et al.
(2002): holiday, holidaymaker, holidays, tourism, tourist,
tourists, travel, visitor, and visitors. Other search words, such
as hospitality, hotels, accommodation, guests, and restau-
rants, were not included because the aim was to confine the
study to tourism PhDs as a strict conceptualization that does
not include hospitality. However, this is not unusual, as all
previous studies (e.g., Afifi, 2009; Botterill et al., 2002; Hall,
1991; Jafari & Aaser, 1988; Meyer-Arendt, 2000; Meyer-
Arendt & Justice, 2002) have focused on examining either
tourism or hospitality. Unlike Botterill et al. (2002), I exam-
ined the thesis abstracts rather than the thesis titles while
searching for the key words. The justification underpinning
this decision was to avoid a main drawback of Botterill
et al.’s (2002) research, which failed to account for a small
number of relevant theses that did not contain any of the
nine key words in their titles. However, searching the the-
sis abstracts rather than the titles was likely to minimize the
number of disregarded related theses but not guarantee that
all related theses were covered.
When these criteria were applied, searching the thesis
abstracts resulted in an initial long list of 1,487 theses. First,
the initial list was revised to remove theses counted twice
because they contained more than one of the key words
in a single abstract, which resulted in a reduction of the
total number of theses to 902. Second, the abstracts of all
902 theses appearing on the new list then went into a long,
intensive process of close examination to eliminate all unre-
lated theses; this included both unrelated topics (e.g., health,
environment, technology) and degrees (e.g., MPhil, MRes,
MBA). This procedure resulted in the generation of a refined
list of 332 theses that included only PhD and DPhil theses
related to tourism that were awarded in the United Kingdom
and Ireland between 2000 and 2009.
Data analysis resulted in the creation of Tables 1, 2,
3, and 4. Data related to the awarding university and the
year of acceptance helped create a simple frequency count
of accepted theses (see Table 1). Examining the universi-
ties’ locations stimulated a geographical distribution of the
accepted theses (see Tables 2 and 3). Analyzing the the-
sis titles and abstracts resulted in the establishment of a
list of the topics studied in tourism PhDs in the United
Kingdom and Ireland (see Table 4). However, of course
the major problem here was to identify into which cate-
gory (e.g., tourism marketing, tourism planning) each thesis
should be classified. Referring to this problem, Jafari and
Aaser (1988, p. 409) stated, “The process was not easy and
caused a number of concerns. For example, a frequent chal-
lenge was to decide if the focus of the dissertation was . . .
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

5. TABLE
1
Chronology
of
PhD
Theses
Awarded
No.
Institution
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Total
1.
Anglia
Ruskin
University
1
1
2
2.
Aston
University
1
1
3.
Bournemouth
University
3
1
1
3
1
1
3
13
4.
Brunel
University
1
2
1
4
5.
Carnfield
University
1
1
6.
City
University
1
1
7.
Coventry
University
1
1
8.
De
Montfort
University
1
1
2
9.
Dublin
City
University
1
1
10.
Dublin
Institute
of
Technology
1
1
11.
Lancaster
University
1
2
1
1
1
6
12.
Leeds
Metropolitan
University
1
2
3
13.
Liverpool
John
Moores
University
1
1
14.
London
Metropolitan
University
1
1
15.
Loughborough
University
1
1
1
1
4
16.
Manchester
Metropolitan
University
2
2
17.
Napier
University
1
1
2
18.
National
University
of
Ireland,
Galway
1
1
19.
National
University
of
Ireland,
Matnooth
2
1
3
20.
Northumbria
University
1
1
21.
Nottingham
Trent
University
1
1
1
3
2
1
9
22.
Open
University
1
1
1
3
23.
Oxford
Brookes
University
1
2
1
1
3
8
24.
Queen
Margaret
University
1
1
2
25.
Robert
Gordon
University
1
1
2
26.
Sheffield
Hallam
University
4
3
1
1
1
2
12
27.
Staffordshire
University
1
1
28.
University
College,
Cork
2
1
1
4
29.
University
College,
Dublin
1
1
30.
University
College,
London
2
1
1
4
31.
University
of
Aberdeen
1
1
1
3
32.
University
of
Birmingham
3
1
4
33.
University
of
Bradford
1
1
34.
University
of
Brighton
1
1
1
3
35.
University
of
Bristol
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
36.
University
of
Cambridge
1
1
1
1
4
37.
University
of
Central
Lancashire
1
1
38.
University
of
Derby
1
1
3
1
1
1
8
39.
University
of
Dublin,
Trinity
College
1
1
40.
University
of
Dundee
1
1
41.
University
of
Durham
1
1
2
1
5
42.
University
of
East
Anglia
1
1
1
3
43.
University
of
East
London
1
1
2
44.
University
of
Edinburgh
1
1
32
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

6. 45.
University
of
Essex
2
1
1
4
46.
University
of
Exeter
2
3
1
1
3
2
2
2
16
47.
University
of
Glamorgan
1
1
2
48.
University
of
Glasgow
1
1
1
1
2
1
7
49.
University
of
Greenwich
1
1
50.
University
of
Huddersfield
1
1
1
3
51.
University
of
Hull
2
1
1
1
5
52.
University
of
Kent
1
2
1
4
53.
University
of
Leeds
1
1
2
54.
University
of
Leicester
1
1
2
55.
University
of
Limerick
1
1
1
1
1
5
56.
University
of
Liverpool
1
1
2
57.
University
of
London,
Goldsmiths
1
1
2
58.
University
of
London,
Imperial
College
1
1
2
59.
University
of
London,
King’s
College
2
2
60.
University
of
London,
Royal
Holloway
1
1
2
61.
University
of
Luton
1
3
1
5
62.
University
of
Manchester
2
1
1
1
1
6
63.
University
of
Newcastle
Upon
Tyne
1
1
2
64.
University
of
North
London
1
1
65.
University
of
Nottingham
2
3
2
2
1
1
11
66.
University
of
Oxford
1
1
1
3
67.
University
of
Plymouth
2
1
1
2
6
68.
University
of
Portsmouth
1
1
2
69.
University
of
Reading
2
1
1
1
5
70.
University
of
Salford
2
1
3
71.
University
of
Sheffield
1
1
2
72.
University
of
Southampton
1
1
2
73.
University
of
Strathclyde
2
5
2
1
3
4
3
2
1
2
25
74.
University
of
Sunderland
1
1
75.
University
of
Surrey
2
3
3
1
6
4
4
5
2
30
76.
University
of
Sussex
1
1
77.
University
of
the
Arts,
London
1
1
78.
University
of
Ulster
1
1
79.
University
of
Wales,
Aberystwyth
1
1
1
1
4
80.
University
of
Wales,
Bangor
1
1
81.
University
of
Wales,
Cardiff
2
1
1
2
1
1
8
82.
University
of
Wales,
Swansea
1
1
2
83.
University
of
Warwick
1
1
84.
University
of
West
of
England,
Bristol
1
2
1
4
85.
University
of
Westminster
1
1
86.
University
of
York
1
1
1
3
Total
24
27
40
32
46
29
33
39
23
39
332
33
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

7. 34 AFIFI
TABLE 2
Geographical Distribution of PhD Theses Awarded
Area
No. of
Universities 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
Theses/
University
South East England 11 4 5 6 8 9 7 5 10 2 7 63 5.7
South West England 5 3 1 10 2 2 2 7 6 5 7 45 9.0
Scotland 8 2 6 5 2 6 5 4 6 2 5 43 5.4
East Midlands 6 4 6 4 4 3 1 7 4 3 36 6.0
Yorkshire and Humber 8 5 4 5 2 1 3 4 3 4 31 3.9
Greater London 13 4 3 4 5 2 3 2 4 27 2.1
North West England 7 2 1 3 3 2 3 1 4 2 21 3.0
Wales 5 3 1 2 1 4 4 1 1 17 3.4
East of England 5 3 1 2 1 2 2 3 14 2.8
Ireland 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 9 3.0
North East England 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 9 2.3
Northern Ireland 6 2 3 3 1 9 1.5
West Midlands 5 1 1 3 1 1 1 8 1.6
Total 86 24 27 40 32 46 29 33 39 23 39 332 3.9
TABLE 3
Geographical Distribution of PhD Theses Awarded in the Four Main Countries
Area No. of Universities 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total No. of Theses Theses/University
England 64 18 17 31 29 32 21 23 31 20 32 254 4.0
Scotland 8 2 6 5 2 6 5 4 6 2 5 43 5.4
Wales 5 3 1 2 1 4 4 1 1 17 3.4
Northern Ireland 6 2 3 3 1 9 1.5
Ireland 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 9 3.0
Total 86 24 27 40 32 46 29 33 39 23 39 332 3.9
extending beyond the reasonable realm of tourism.” So, in
order to classify the topics a simple procedure was used.
First, a list of all of the topics appearing in Botterill et al.’s
(2002) article was created, which resulted in a record of
22 topics. Second, I conducted an initial analysis to allocate
each thesis to one of topics appearing on Botterill et al.’s
list. If none of the topics was applicable, a new heading
was suggested. This procedure resulted in the generation of
a new list of 36 headings. Third, three academics, work-
ing independently, were assigned to revise the suggested
classification, which resulted in the creation of three mod-
ified classifications. Fourth, a Delphi technique (see, e.g.,
Bramwell & Hykawy, 1999; Hanafin, 2004) was applied
whereby the opinions of the three academics were circu-
lated to all of them again and they were asked to declare
which opinion they thought to be the most appropriate and
whether they wanted to modify their ideas in light of the
other academics’ opinions. This process was repeated twice
before a final consensus was built. Consequently, five addi-
tional headings were added and one heading was omitted,
which resulted in the generation of a final classification
comprising 40 headings for the tourism PhD topics (see
Table 4).
DATA ANALYSIS
An analysis of the data on tourism PhD theses accepted in
the United Kingdom and Ireland resulted in the formation of
Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Table 1 shows that, between 2000 and 2009, 332 the-
ses were accepted in total at 86 universities in the United
Kingdom and Ireland. In comparison with the period
1990–1999, when 149 theses were completed at 51 uni-
versities, the current situation could be described as a
giant leap. The massive expansion in the number of
both theses (increased by 122%) and universities involved
(increased by 68.6%) evidently reflects the contempo-
rary growth of tourism postgraduate research in the past
decade.
Two universities produced about 16.6% of the accepted
theses: University of Surrey with the gigantic number of
30 theses, followed by University of Strathclyde with 25 the-
ses. The two universities are maintaining their leading posi-
tion in tourism PhD studies, which was previously evidenced
in Botterill et al.’s (2002) studies. This is not surprising,
knowing that “two of the earliest, dedicated postgraduate
courses in tourism were created in the early 1970s at the
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

8. SURVEY OF DOCTORAL THESES 35
TABLE 4
Categories of Topics Investigated in UK and Irish Tourism PhDs Awarded Between 2000 and 2009
No. Topic Investigated 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
1. Sustainable Tourism 2 5 5 4 5 3 3 5 32
2. Tourism Industry 1 1 4 3 3 4 7 1 1 25
3. Tourism Impact 2 2 7 1 3 2 4 2 23
4. Tourism Imagery 1 3 3 5 2 1 2 1 3 21
5. Tourist Interpretation 1 2 1 3 3 3 2 2 17
6. Tourism Marketing 2 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 16
7. Tourism Development 4 1 3 2 3 2 15
8. Urban Tourism 3 1 2 1 1 1 4 13
9. Tourist Behavior 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 12
10. Tourism Management 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 11
11. Tourism Ecology 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 11
12. Tourism History 1 4 1 2 1 1 10
13. Tourism Policy 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 10
14. Destinations 2 1 1 1 1 2 8
15. Tourism Technology 1 1 1 3 1 1 8
16. Sex Tourism 3 1 1 2 1 8
17. Tourist Motivation 2 2 3 7
18. Rural Tourism 1 2 2 1 6
19. Tourist Attractions 1 2 1 2 6
20. Tourist Demand 1 1 2 1 1 6
21. Tourism Hosting Community 2 1 1 1 1 6
22. Special Events 1 1 4 6
23. Tourist Decision Making 1 3 1 5
24. Tourist Satisfaction 1 1 1 1 1 5
25. Tourism Education 2 1 1 1 5
26. Tourism Economics 2 1 2 5
27. Tourism Planning 1 1 1 1 4
28. Tourism Sociology 3 1 4
29. Tourism and Politics 1 1 2 4
30. Crisis/Risk Management 1 1 1 3
31. Tourism and Anthropology 2 1 3
32. Tourism and Globalization 2 1 3
33. Niche Tourism 1 2 3
34. Tourism Ethics 1 1 2
35. Tourism Geography 1 1 2
36. Tourism Psychology 1 1 2
37. Tourism and Art 1 1 2
38. Tourism Benchmarking 1 1
39. Tourism Theory 1 1
40. Tourists’ Preferences 1 1
Total 24 27 40 32 46 29 33 39 23 39 332
universities of Strathclyde and Surry” (Botterill & Gale,
2005, p. 470), which makes these two universities of a
special magnetism with their long, embedded history of
tourism postgraduate research. Four other universities pro-
vided 15.7% of the accepted theses: University of Exeter
(16 theses), Bournemouth University (13 theses), Sheffield
Hallam University (12 theses), and University of Nottingham
(11 theses). A group comprising five universities provided
12% of the tourism theses: Nottingham Trent University
(9 theses); Oxford Brookes University, University of Derby,
and University of Wales, Cardiff (8 theses each); and
University of Glasgow (7 theses). Finally, four universities
accepted six theses each: Lancaster University, University
of Bristol, University of Manchester, and University of
Plymouth.
In total, these top 15 universities accepted 171 theses,
which represent almost 51.5% of all tourism theses accepted
during that period. The other 71 universities shared the
remaining 48.5%. In this context, it can easily be con-
cluded that an average university produced 3.9 theses over
the period researched (i.e., 10 years), or, in plainer words,
one PhD thesis every 2 years and 7 months.
Chronologically speaking, no stable pattern can be con-
cluded, as the period studied was full of several ups
and downs (see Figure 2). However, the period studied
(2000–2009) seemed to be an extension of the previous
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

9. 36 AFIFI
FIGURE 2 Production of PhD theses in the United Kingdom and Ireland between 2000 and 2009 (color figure available online).
4 years (1996–1999) in which the same unsteady pattern
existed, as 22, 29, 19, and 22 theses were presented
consecutively (Botterill et al., 2002). The year 2000 started
shyly with just 24 theses; however, the year 2008 ended with
a not-too-far number (23 theses). In between 2000 and 2009,
the year 2004 thrived with an extraordinary record of 46 the-
ses. The year 2002 appeared, as well, with 40 theses. It is
strange that those two superb years were followed by two
average years, with 32 theses in 2003 and just 29 theses in
2005. On an annual stand, it can be stated that 33.2 tourism
PhD theses were awarded yearly between 2000 and 2009;
or in other words, there was one tourism PhD awarded in
the United Kingdom and Ireland every 11 days. University
of Surry had an outstanding record of six accepted theses
in 2004. However, University of Strathclyde was the only
university that provided accepted theses in each year of the
period studied.
The names and addresses of the awarding universi-
ties were analyzed to reflect the geographical location of
each university, which resulted in the creation of Table 2.
Geographically speaking, South East England led the pro-
duction of tourism PhDs in the United Kingdom and Ireland,
with a share of almost 19%. South West England and
Scotland held the second and third positions, with 13.6% and
13%, respectively. However, the last four regions—Ireland,
Northern Ireland, North East England, and West Midlands—
jointly produced 13.3% only. Examining the relationship
between the number of theses and the number of universi-
ties in each territory revealed that universities in South West
England were definitely active in awarding tourism PhDs,
with an astonishing average of nine theses per university
over the period studied. In contrast, universities in Northern
Ireland and West Midlands seemed more conservative, with
less than two theses awarded per university in these territo-
ries (see Figure 3).
Classifying the awarded theses according to the major
five participating countries (i.e., England, Wales, Scotland,
Northern Ireland, and Ireland) showed that England, as
expected, awarded the biggest number of tourism PhDs over
the period investigated, as it awarded about 76.5% of the
9
43
31
36
14
27
63
45
8
17
21
9
9
FIGURE 3 Geographical distribution of PhD theses awarded (color figure
available online).
tourism theses in the United Kingdom and Ireland. However,
this does not necessarily mean that the English universities
were the most active all over the United Kingdom and
Ireland. Actually, the Scottish universities came first con-
cerning productivity, with an average of 5.4 theses per
university. In contrast, the Northern Ireland universities were
reluctant to award tourism PhDs, with an average of just
1.5 theses per university. Finally, England and Scotland suc-
ceeded in awarding PhDs in every year of the period studied.
In contrast, Northern Ireland did not award any PhD in six
different years, Ireland in 3 years, and Wales in 2005 and
2008. However, 2004 was the only year in which all five
countries awarded PhDs.
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

10. SURVEY OF DOCTORAL THESES 37
As already mentioned, thesis abstracts were analyzed to
identify the topic of each PhD (see Table 4). In this context,
sustainable tourism stands alone as the most attractive
tourism PhD topic in the United Kingdom and Ireland, with
9.6% of the awarded theses. Sustainable tourism emerged as
a fashionable topic especially between 2002 and 2005, as
well as in 2009, and it was the most awarded topic in these
5 years. Three other areas seemed to attract a significant per-
centage of the PhD researchers: tourism industry, tourism
impact, and tourism imagery, which jointly embodied 20.8%
of the researched topics. However, these three areas were
maintaining the distinguished positions they had between
1990 and 1999 (in Botterill et al.’s, 2002, research they are
ranked fourth, second, and sixth, respectively). These top
four topics were followed by five other subjects accounting
for about 18.4% of the researched topics: tourist inter-
pretation, tourism marketing, tourism development, urban
tourism, and tourist behavior.
However, areas such as tourism benchmarking, tourism
theory, tourism psychology, tourism ethics, and tourism
geography are examples of the subjects that received lit-
tle attention. However, it could be noted that tourism
benchmarking can be described as a relatively new area that
has been recently linked to tourism, which may provide
an explanation for why it did not receive much consider-
ation. However, the first benchmarking tourism PhD was
awarded in 2000, which should raise the question of why
this topic has not drawn the attention of more researchers
since 2000. The other neglected topics could hardly be
described as new areas of tourism research, but it is obvi-
ous that they were not attracting much of the researchers’
enthusiasm.
Table 4 shows that tourism planning and rural tourism
were receiving diminishing attention, as no single research
had been conducted in these two areas since 2003 and 2006,
despite their relatively good appearance during the early
years of the period researched. Areas such as e-tourism,
social networking, and communication will most probably
be among the most attractive topics to exist in a future list of
tourism PhD subjects.
Finally, investigating whether some thesis topics clustered
or not in certain universities (i.e., the development of some
local expertise in a topic) resulted in the creation of Table 5,
which shows the existence of such a clustering trend in few
universities. For instance, University of Surrey seems to be
centralized around five main topics (i.e., destination imagery,
sustainable tourism, tourism industry, tourist behavior, and
tourist decision making) that represent 19 out of the 30 the-
ses conducted in Surrey. The same pattern emerged in several
other universities, such as Exeter, Strathclyde, and Sheffield
Hallam, where specific topics (e.g., tourism industry, tourist
behavior, tourism management) formed the focal interests
of these universities. However, the clustering of some top-
ics in certain universities could be due to the long embedded
history of these universities in these topics, the current avail-
ability of eminent supervisors in these specific areas, or the
existence of specific needs for these topics in the universities’
local regions.
TABLE 5
The Relationship Between Universities and Specific PhD Topics
University PhD Topic No. of Theses in University Percentage
University of Surrey Destination Imagery 19/30 63.3
Sustainable Tourism
Tourism Industry
Tourist Behavior
Tourist Decision Making
University of Exeter Tourism Industry 10/16 62.3
Tourist Behavior
Tourism Destination
Tourism Marketing
University of Strathclyde Crisis Management 13/25 52
Ecotourism
Tourism Development
Tourism Industry
Tourism Management
Sheffield Hallam University Tourism Management 6/12 50
Tourism Planning
Tourism Policy
University of Birmingham Tourism Policy 2/4 50
University of Cambridge Sex Tourism 2/4 50
Loughborough University Tourism Technology 2/4 50
University of Luton Destination Imagery 2/5 40
Nottingham Trent University Destination Imagery 3/9 33.3
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

11. 38 AFIFI
A final remark is that five out of the eight theses con-
ducted about sex tourism were accepted at universities
located in two regions—East England and Greater London—
which could be regarded as a significant indication of a
major relationship between PhD topic and tourist activities
in specific areas.
CONCLUSIONS
Tourism postgraduate education cannot be described as a
new educational discipline in the United Kingdom and
Ireland, as the first PhD was awarded more than 40 years ago.
In spite of the vague, nested start, when tourism PhDs were
accomplished mainly by researchers coming from other dis-
ciplines, soon the growth of the tourism industry stimulated
the independence of both undergraduate and postgraduate
tourism education, which consequently resulted in the emer-
gence of devoted tourism researchers. However, scanning the
literature on tourism postgraduate education reveals that few
researchers have been aware of the importance of investigat-
ing this area, as few studies have been carried out to survey
tourism PhDs in the United Kingdom, the United States,
Australia, Egypt, and Turkey.
First, data extracted from this research show a growth of
122% in the number of PhDs accepted between 2000 and
2009 compared to the period 1990–1999. Second, in spite
of such overall escalation, the research reveals an obvi-
ous numeric fluctuation in the annual production of tourism
PhDs, such that no stable trend can be observed. Third, being
the first two universities to offer tourism postgraduate pro-
grams in the United Kingdom, the Universities of Surrey
and Strathclyde still exceed all of their counterparts, as they
are jointly awarding about 1.7 of each 10 tourism theses in
the United Kingdom and Ireland. Fourth, the research dis-
closes that, geographically speaking, South East England
leads the production of tourism PhDs in the United Kingdom
and Ireland, whereas West Midlands comes last. Linking
the number of PhDs to the number of universities offering
tourism programs results in South West England coming first
with an average of nine theses per university and Northern
Ireland coming last with only 1.5 theses per university. Fifth,
England is awarding about 7.7 of each 10 accepted theses
in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Finally, regarding the
topics investigated in tourism PhDs, four areas excel as the
most studied topics: sustainable tourism, tourism industry,
tourism impact, and tourism imagery. In contrast, the list
of relatively ignored areas expands to include subjects like
tourism benchmarking, tourism psychology, tourism theory,
and tourism ethics.
In this context, it could be claimed that tourism research
has evolved from focusing on basic subjects such as mea-
suring tourism impacts, setting tourism policies, and under-
standing tourist behavior (see Botterill et al., 2002; Hall,
1991) to concentrating on more contemporary issues such
as tourism technology, special events, tourism sociology,
and tourism and art, which have recently started to flourish.
However, the rapid growth of the tourism industry and the
high dynamicity embedded in it will most probably stimulate
the incessant updating of the studied subjects such that new
topics (e.g., tourism small and medium enterprises [SMEs],
tourism and social networking, tourism and communica-
tion, niche tourism) will keep coming up. Accordingly, UK
and Irish universities and planners of tourism education
should be aware of the possibility of expansion in both
the number and diversity of upcoming tourism PhD sub-
jects, which will most probably develop to cover new areas
(e.g., communication and social networking) that might be
to some extent outside the focal interest of current tourism
academics.
Finally, several related issues can be suggested for fur-
ther research, including procedures of PhD topic selection,
the compatibility of topics with the actual needs of the
tourism industry, the relationship between researchers and
their supervisors, the extent to which thesis conclusions and
recommendations are applied, the centralization of specific
topics in some universities, and the difficulties of conduct-
ing tourism postgraduate research. All are potential areas that
require more efforts.
REFERENCES
Afifi, G. (2009). Tourism as the subject of doctoral theses in Egypt,
1975–2008. Anatolia, 20(2), 387–400.
Afifi, G. (2010). E-learning as an alternative strategy for tourism higher
education in Egypt. 3rd WSEAS International Conference on Cultural
Heritage and Tourism (pp. 35–44). Corfu, Greece: WSEAS Press.
Airey, D., & Johnson, S. (1998). The profile of tourism studies degree
courses in the UK, 1997/98. London, England: National Liaison Group
for Higher Education in Tourism.
Amoah, V., & Baum, T. (1997). Tourism education: Policy versus practice.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 9(1),
5–12.
Barrows, C., & Bosselman, R. (1999). Hospitality management education.
Binghamton, NY: Haworth Hospitality Press.
Botterill, D., & Gale, T. (2005). An international handbook of tourism
education. London, England: Elsevier.
Botterill, D., Haven, C., & Gale, T. (2002). A survey of doctoral theses
accepted by universities in the UK and Ireland for studies related to
tourism, 1990–1999. Journal of Tourist Studies, 2(3), 283–311.
Bramwell, L., & Hykawy, E. (1999). The Delphi technique: A possible tool
for predicting future events in nursing education. Canadian Journal of
Nursing Research, 30(4), 47–58.
Christou, E. (1999). Hospitality management education in Greece: An
exploratory study. Tourism Management, 20, 683–691.
Cooper, C., Scales, R., & Westlake, J. (1992). The anatomy of tourism
and hospitality educators in the UK. Tourism Management, 13(2),
234–241.
Dale, C., & Robinson, N. (2001). The theming of tourism educa-
tion: A three-domain approach. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 13(1), 30–34.
Echtner, C., & Jamal, T. (1997). The disciplinary dilemma of tourism
studies. Annals of Tourism Research, 24, 71868–71883.
Goeldner, C. (2001). Tourism education: North American experience.
Journal of Teaching in Travel and Tourism, 1(1), 97–107.
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013

12. SURVEY OF DOCTORAL THESES 39
Hall, C. (1991). Tourism as the subject of post-graduate dissertations in
Australia. Annals of Tourism Research, 18, 520–523.
Hanafin, S. (2004). Review of literature on the Delphi technique.
Retrieved from http://www.nco.ie/upload_documents/Delphi_overview_
for_publication.pdf
Harrison, D. (2001).Tourism and the less developed countries: Issues and
case studies. Oxon, UK: CABI Publishing.
Jafari, J., & Aaser, D. (1988). Tourism as the subject of doctoral disserta-
tions. Annals of Tourism Research, 15, 407–429.
Knowles, T., Teixeira, R., & Egan, D. (2003). Tourism and hospitality edu-
cation in Brazil and the U.K.: A comparison. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 15(1), 45–51.
Learning and Teaching Support Network for Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and
Tourism 22. (2002, June). Baseline statement. Unpublished report.
Meyer-Arendt, K. (2000). Commentary: Tourism geography as the subject
of North American doctoral dissertation and master’s theses: 1951-98.
Tourism Geographies, 2(2), 140–156.
Meyer-Arendt, K., & Justice, C. (2002). Tourism as the subject of
North American doctoral dissertations, 1987–2000. Annals of Tourism
Research, 29, 1171–1174.
Okumus, F., & Yagci, K. (2006). Tourism higher education in Turkey.
Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 5(1/2), 89–116.
Pizam, A., & Chacko, M. (1982). Tourism and hospitality related disserta-
tions, 1976-1980. Annals of Tourism Research, 9, 587–562.
Shahalizadeh, M., Amirjamshidi, G., & Shahalizadeh, S. (2009).
Benchmarking of thesis research: A case study. Benchmarking, 16(1),
103–123.
Sigala, M., & Baum, T. (2003). Trends and issues in tourism and hospitality
higher education: Visioning the future. Tourism and Hospitality Research,
4(4), 367–376.
Stuart, M. (2002). Critical influences on tourism as a subject in UK higher
education: Lecturer perspectives. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport
and Tourism Education, 1(1), 5–18.
Tribe, J. (1997). The indiscipline of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,
24, 638–657.
Wilson, K. (2002). Quality assurance issues for a PhD by pub-
lished work: A case study. Quality Assurance in Education, 10(2),
71–78.
World Tourism Organization. (2002). Tourism and poverty alleviation.
Madrid, Spain: Author.
Downloaded
by
[Dr
Galal
M.
H.
Afifi]
at
11:44
07
May
2013
View publication stats
View publication stats