This study examines smart tourism governance in Spanish destinations using grounded analysis of key stakeholder perspectives, with a focus on sustainability, innovation, and resilience. The analysis reveals an institutional logic that positions smart tourism as a predominantly technology-driven strategy aimed at enhancing efficiency and competitiveness. Three interrelated themes emerge as follows: the Technocratic Imperative (emphasis on data-driven decision-making and technological infrastructure), the Sustainability Paradox (tensions between economic growth objectives and social equity commitments), and the Collaborative Ideal ((reflecting institutional aspirations for network-based governance). The findings highlight persistent power asymmetries and operational challenges, underscoring gaps between policy rhetoric and on-the-ground implementation. By situating these dynamics within a critical institutional framework, the study offers empirically informed recommendations for fostering more effective, resilient, and sustainable smart tourism ecosystems.
AnsellC.GashA. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
2.
BoesK.BuhalisD.InversiniA. (2016). Smart tourism destinations: Ecosystems for tourism destination competitiveness. International Journal of Tourism Cities, 2(2), 108–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJTC-12-2015-0032
3.
BuhalisD.AmarangganaA. (2015). Smart tourism destinations: Enhancing tourism experience through personalisation of services. In TussyadiahI.InversiniA. (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2015 (pp. 377–389): Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14343-9_28
4.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.
5.
ErrichielloL.MiceraR. (2021). A process-based perspective of smart tourism destination governance. European Journal of Tourism Research, 29, 2909. https://doi.org/10.54055/ejtr.v29i.2436
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
8.
GösslingS. (2021). Tourism, technology and ICT: A critical review of affordances and concessions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(5), 733–750. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1873353
HallC. M. (2011). Policy learning and policy failure in sustainable tourism governance: From first- and second-order to third-order change?Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4–5), 649–671. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2011.555555
12.
Ivars-BaidalJ. A.Celdrán-BernabeuM. A.MazónJ. N.Perles IvarsA. (2019). Smart destinations and the evolution of ICTs: A new scenario for destination management?Current Issues in Tourism, 22(13), 1581–1600. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1388771
13.
JovicicD. Z. (2019). From the traditional understanding of tourism destination to the smart tourism destination. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(3), 276–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1313203
KooC.ShinS.GretzelU.HunterW. C.ChungN. (2016). Conceptualization of smart tourism destination competitiveness. Asia Pacific. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, 26(4), 561–576. https://doi.org/10.14329/apjis.2016.26.4.561
16.
LiY.HuC.HuangC.DuanL. (2018). The concept of smart tourism in the context of tourism information services. Tourism Management, 58, 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.03.014
PasquinelliC.TrunfioM. (2023). Sustainability-oriented innovation in smart tourism: Challenges and pitfalls of technology deployment for sustainable destinations. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33677-5
19.
PresenzaA.MiceraR.SplendianiS.Del ChiappaG. (2014). Stakeholder e-involvement and participatory tourism planning: Analysis of an Italian case study. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development8, 5(3), 311-328. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJKBD.2014.065320
20.
RhodesR. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Open University Press.
