326 D.Lin,D.Simmons Tourism Management 63 (2017)315-328 (destination)planning team and the SCD became the key stake- within the context of strong state regulation is able to be inter- holders within the participation process can be partially attributed preted through the integration of stakeholder theory,network to ongoing discussions among urban planning academics on mov theory and governance theory-related research,which further ing away from elite-dominated blue-print plans towards a bottom- improves the government-led background of the stakeholders up planning process paradigm in both planning research and involved in cooperation planning.Second,the article demonstrates practices (e.g.,Chen,2009:Wang Li,2013).While these stake- the roles of key stakeholders (who have both social capital and holders might change in other contexts we argue that the processes institutional capital)in joint participation for tourism planning. of change and the success of this model have the potential visibility Finally,the article reveals a possible model of tourism management to influence other planning practices elsewhere. in the context of the simultaneous presence of top-down state The ITDP case also suggests that there are significant limitations regulation and bottom-up social participation.It is possible to on the public participation process in China and highlights the achieve a two-way participatory empowerment by introducing a challenges that this process is currently facing at.First,the struc- third party as a coordinator to promote effective collaboration, tural limitations on public participation are hard to ignore.These which may contribute to more sustainable tourism outcomes at limitations have similarities with those identified by Tosun(2000) destinations.These changes require more testing to support a as being associated with institutional,power,legislative,and eco- robust understanding with the goal of improving future policy nomic structures and systems.Tourism partnerships are still un- making and practices to promote the publics'involvement in derdeveloped due to the many organizational and political tourism planning processes.Two main areas of future research are constraints throughout China.Of note for this case study is the required,namely:the evaluation of the effectiveness of stakeholder proximity of Shenzhen to Hong Kong and,therefore,Shenzhen's involvement in the decision-making process of tourism planning. increasing interactions with international visitation (and invest- including the need to critically examine the role of key stakeholders ment)and the ideas embodied therein.Thus,it is anticipated that (Fodness,2016);and the need to consider how to empower the conceptual and administrative vacuums that exist between stakeholders through both technology and institutional strategies tourism planning and spatial planning in the JCW in particular will to promote the public's involvement in tourism planning processes be more pronounced elsewhere in China.It will take a concerted with the goal of improving future policy making and practices effort from both the public sector and civil society to ensure that (Bramwell,Higham,Lane,Miller,2017). current and emerging tourism partnerships contribute to sustain- able futures.The questions of how to build institutional platforms Acknowledgements to promote local residents'participation in tourism planning decision-making,as well as of how to incorporate broader interests This work was supported by China National Social Science in tourism development,need to be explored further.Whether new Foundation under Grant 14CGL052;and Jinan University China legislation and planning frameworks will soon emerge due to under Grant 12615802,and Grant for Higher Level University Fund. future structural (political)changes will be a critical factor in pro- It was also undertaken with support from the Pencheng scholar moting public participation in tourism and other forms of public based at Shenzhen Tourism College,Jinan University.The paper has resource planning.In addition to these structural limitations,cul- been presented in 33rd International Geographical Congress.The tural limitations are also evident (Tosun,2000).The public's low authors wish to thank conference participants for helpful sugges- level of awareness of the need for,and capacity to participate,as tions and advice on matters relating to the paper.Thanks are also well as the public's difficulties in comprehending complex and addressed to the reviewers and editors,for their constructive technical planning issues,are always a constraint on public comments in improving the paper.The usual disclaimers apply. participation.More broadly.a lack of understanding of the decision-making processes(and the complexities of national,state References and local dimensions of planning)is a further significant constraint. How to improve the awareness of residents,with the goal of Albrecht.J.N.(2013).Networking for sustainable tourism-towards a research securing their involvement in planning through education or other agenda.Journal of Sustainable Tourism.21(5).639-657. approaches to capacity-raising.remains a key concern.The picture Araujo.L M.D..Bramwell.B.(1999).Stakeholder assessment and collaborative tourism planning:The case of Brazil's Costa Dourada project Journal of Sus that has emerged,albeit from a single case study,is encouraging ta1abe1sS1.7341356-378. with regard to public participation in tourism destination planning Arnstein,S.R.(1969)A ladder of citizen participation.Joumal of the American in China.Inevitably,though,there were limitations in what could P01n1gAss07a0n.3541.216=224. Atkinson.R.Flint,I.(2001).Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: be pursued through interviews.A recurring consideration during Snowball research strategies.Social Research Update,33(1).1-4. the research design phase was whether comparative case or lon- Bao,I,Sun,I.(2003)On the community participation in tourism planning gitudinal studies would unearth different possibilities in terms of 规划的杜区参与研究- -以阳朔遇龙河风景旅游区为例).Planners(规划师).(O7). understanding general dynamics in tourism planning in China.It 32-38. Beaumont,N..Dredge,D.(2010).Local tourism goverance:A comparison of could be argued that even though the social-economic contesta- three network approaches.Journal of Sustainable Tourism,18(1).7-28. tions are particularly significant in Shenzhen,the case does reflect Beritelli,P.(2011).Cooperation among prominent actors in a tourist destination the on-going process emerging in China,especially as many inland Annals of Tourism Research,38(2).607-629. Bramwell,B.(2011).Governance,the state and sustainable tourism:A political cities enter into a similar developmental pressures and touristic economy approach.Joumal of Sustainable Tourism,19(4-5).459-477.http:// exposure. dx.do1.0rg/10.1080/096695822011.576765. Bramwell,B.(2015).Theoretical activity in sustainable tourism research.Annals of In a wider context,there are three main contributions of this Tourism Research,54.204-218.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2015.07.005 article to knowledge.First,the paper introduces a new pattern of Bramwell,B.,Lane,B.(2000).Tourism collaboration and partnerships:Polirics collaborative planning in tourism,which further enriches relevant proctice and sustainability (VoL 2).Channel View Publications theories of public participation in tourism planning.The introduced Bramwell,B.,Higham,J.Lane,B..Miller.G.(2017).Twenty-five years of sus- tainable tourism and the Journal of Sustainable Tourism:Looking back and concept of "structured network collaboration"develops the con- moving forward.Joumal of Sustainable Tourism,25(1).1-9.http://dx doi.org/ ceptual connotation of network mobility by integrating institu- 10.1080096695822017.1251689. tional capital and social capital and therefore contributes to the Bramwell,B.Sharman,A.(1999).Collaboration in local tourism policymaking Annals of Tourism Research,26(2).392-415. network research paradigm of collaborative planning in tourism. Brundtland,G.H.World Commission.(1987)The World commission on envi- Concomitantly,stakeholder involvement in planning collaboration ronment and Development:Our common future.Oxford University.(destination) planning team and the SCD became the key stake￾holders within the participation process can be partially attributed to ongoing discussions among urban planning academics on mov￾ing away from elite-dominated blue-print plans towards a bottom￾up planning process paradigm in both planning research and practices (e.g., Chen, 2009; Wang & Li, 2013). While these stake￾holders might change in other contexts we argue that the processes of change and the success of this model have the potential visibility to influence other planning practices elsewhere. The JTDP case also suggests that there are significant limitations on the public participation process in China and highlights the challenges that this process is currently facing at. First, the struc￾tural limitations on public participation are hard to ignore. These limitations have similarities with those identified by Tosun (2000) as being associated with institutional, power, legislative, and eco￾nomic structures and systems. Tourism partnerships are still un￾derdeveloped due to the many organizational and political constraints throughout China. Of note for this case study is the proximity of Shenzhen to Hong Kong and, therefore, Shenzhen's increasing interactions with international visitation (and invest￾ment) and the ideas embodied therein. Thus, it is anticipated that the conceptual and administrative vacuums that exist between tourism planning and spatial planning in the JCW in particular will be more pronounced elsewhere in China. It will take a concerted effort from both the public sector and civil society to ensure that current and emerging tourism partnerships contribute to sustain￾able futures. The questions of how to build institutional platforms to promote local residents' participation in tourism planning decision-making, as well as of how to incorporate broader interests in tourism development, need to be explored further. Whether new legislation and planning frameworks will soon emerge due to future structural (political) changes will be a critical factor in pro￾moting public participation in tourism and other forms of public resource planning. In addition to these structural limitations, cul￾tural limitations are also evident (Tosun, 2000). The public's low level of awareness of the need for, and capacity to participate, as well as the public's difficulties in comprehending complex and technical planning issues, are always a constraint on public participation. More broadly, a lack of understanding of the decision-making processes (and the complexities of national, state and local dimensions of planning) is a further significant constraint. How to improve the awareness of residents, with the goal of securing their involvement in planning through education or other approaches to capacity-raising, remains a key concern. The picture that has emerged, albeit from a single case study, is encouraging with regard to public participation in tourism destination planning in China. Inevitably, though, there were limitations in what could be pursued through interviews. A recurring consideration during the research design phase was whether comparative case or lon￾gitudinal studies would unearth different possibilities in terms of understanding general dynamics in tourism planning in China. It could be argued that even though the social-economic contesta￾tions are particularly significant in Shenzhen, the case does reflect the on-going process emerging in China, especially as many inland cities enter into a similar developmental pressures and touristic exposure. In a wider context, there are three main contributions of this article to knowledge. First, the paper introduces a new pattern of collaborative planning in tourism, which further enriches relevant theories of public participation in tourism planning. The introduced concept of “structured network collaboration” develops the con￾ceptual connotation of network mobility by integrating institu￾tional capital and social capital and therefore contributes to the network research paradigm of collaborative planning in tourism. Concomitantly, stakeholder involvement in planning collaboration within the context of strong state regulation is able to be inter￾preted through the integration of stakeholder theory, network theory and governance theory-related research, which further improves the government-led background of the stakeholders involved in cooperation planning. Second, the article demonstrates the roles of key stakeholders (who have both social capital and institutional capital) in joint participation for tourism planning. Finally, the article reveals a possible model of tourism management in the context of the simultaneous presence of top-down state regulation and bottom-up social participation. It is possible to achieve a two-way participatory empowerment by introducing a third party as a coordinator to promote effective collaboration, which may contribute to more sustainable tourism outcomes at destinations. These changes require more testing to support a robust understanding with the goal of improving future policy making and practices to promote the publics' involvement in tourism planning processes. Two main areas of future research are required, namely: the evaluation of the effectiveness of stakeholder involvement in the decision-making process of tourism planning, including the need to critically examine the role of key stakeholders (Fodness, 2016); and the need to consider how to empower stakeholders through both technology and institutional strategies to promote the public's involvement in tourism planning processes with the goal of improving future policy making and practices (Bramwell, Higham, Lane, & Miller, 2017). Acknowledgements This work was supported by China National Social Science Foundation under Grant 14CGL052; and Jinan University China under Grant 12615802, and Grant for Higher Level University Fund. It was also undertaken with support from the Pencheng scholar based at Shenzhen Tourism College, Jinan University. The paper has been presented in 33rd International Geographical Congress. The authors wish to thank conference participants for helpful sugges￾tions and advice on matters relating to the paper. Thanks are also addressed to the reviewers and editors, for their constructive comments in improving the paper. The usual disclaimers apply. References Albrecht, J. N. (2013). Networking for sustainable tourismetowards a research agenda. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(5), 639e657. Araujo, L. M. D., & Bramwell, B. (1999). Stakeholder assessment and collaborative tourism planning: The case of Brazil's Costa Dourada project. Journal of Sus￾tainable Tourism, 7(3e4), 356e378. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216e224. Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2001). Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball research strategies. Social Research Update, 33(1), 1e4. Bao, J., & Sun, J. (2003). On the community participation in tourism planning (旅游 规划的社区参与研究dd以阳朔遇龙河风景旅游区为例). Planners (规划师), (07), 32e38. Beaumont, N., & Dredge, D. (2010). Local tourism governance: A comparison of three network approaches. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(1), 7e28. Beritelli, P. (2011). Cooperation among prominent actors in a tourist destination. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(2), 607e629. Bramwell, B. (2011). Governance, the state and sustainable tourism: A political economy approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4e5), 459e477. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2011.576765. Bramwell, B. (2015). Theoretical activity in sustainable tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 54, 204e218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2015.07.005. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2000). Tourism collaboration and partnerships: Politics, practice and sustainability (Vol. 2). Channel View Publications. Bramwell, B., Higham, J., Lane, B., & Miller, G. (2017). Twenty-five years of sus￾tainable tourism and the Journal of Sustainable Tourism: Looking back and moving forward. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(1), 1e9. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/09669582.2017.1251689. Bramwell, B., & Sharman, A. (1999). Collaboration in local tourism policymaking. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 392e415. Brundtland, G. H., & World Commission. (1987). The World commission on envi￾ronment and Development: Our common future. Oxford University. 326 D. Lin, D. Simmons / Tourism Management 63 (2017) 315e328