Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Destination Marketing & Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jdmm

Local experiences on Instagram: Social media data as source of evidence for

experience design.
Marika Gon
Università degli Studi di Udine, Italy

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Local experience is a complex and subjective concept, which has moved from the simple consumption of products
Tourism experience design (e.g. local products and local activities) to a wide range of social interactions in both the real and digital world (e.
Local experience g. localhood). In these times of experience economy, destinations will often compete in offering their distinctive
Social media data mining
local experiences and designing experiences has become crucial in destination management and marketing. To
Consumer generated content analysis
Instagram
design and deliver local experiences, destinations need to be supported by methodological innovation and
Leximancer updated data sources. Social media can satisfy these requirements, because it contains user-generated content
about human experiences. Nevertheless, limited research has been conducted, to date to understand the potential
of social media in experience design. The purpose of this paper is to explore how user-generated content can
contribute to design thinking. In agreement with the principle that ‘everyone can – and does – design’ this paper
investigates local experiences in the social media environment, in which everyone can co-produce information.
The paper first reviews the concepts of ‘local’ and ‘local experiences’ in the academic literature and then expands
the research into the discussion of social media, investigating secondary data posted by users with #local* and
#localexperience*. Instagram is one of the most used platforms in the world and it was selected based on pre­
vious research conducted on local experiences.
The results of this study contribute to the understanding of what and who is associated to local experiences,
suggesting that social media can provide new knowledge by expanding on existing topics and introducing
missing dimensions as the basis for a holistic understanding of experiences.
Local experiences on Instagram are related to traveling and associated with outdoor activities and local people.
The analysis reveals insights into the use of hashtags in Instagram: #localexperience* is largely employed by
professional accounts to brand tourism activities, contrary to #local* which is preferred by the vast majority of
users in posting everyday life images. User-generated content is presented as a resource for experience design to
enhance destination marketing and management. A method for data mining and content analysis of Instagram
textual data (hashtags, comments and user profiles) is presented to foster research and comparison among social
media platforms, as a way to address future directions in tourism design management and to develop implica­
tions to destination management.

1. Introduction in the marketing of products, places and destinations (Freire, 2009;

Tourists move across the globe to visit places and search for mean­
ingful experiences and interaction with local people, generically defined
as ‘the local atmosphere’ (Pine & Gilmore, 1998, 2011; Tussyadiah &
Pesonen, 2016a, b). Local products, food, art, heritage and traditions
have always been used to characterize the specificity of communities
and places (Sims, 2009, 2013, p. 475), and their promotion is one of the
most effective ways through which destinations compete (Du Rand &
Heath, 2006). It is unquestionable that, nowadays, ‘local’ is a buzzword
Hampton, 2005; Hultman & Hall, 2012; Morris & Buller, 2003; Russo &
Richards, 2016; Sims, 2009, 2013, p. 475). The booming explosion of
collaborative economies (Dredge & Gyimothy, 2015, 2017) and the
experience economy (Pine & Gilmore, 1998, 2011) have fostered in­
terest in anything and anyone identifiable as local (Russo & Richards,
2016). Travelers’ opportunities to meet hosting communities, sharing
their everyday life spaces and experiencing the destination by ‘living like
a local’ (Guttentag, 2015; Heo, 2016; Paulauskaite et al., 2017) have
contributed to the overall appeal of the local experience. A shared sense

E-mail address: Marika.gon@uniud.it.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100435
Received 30 September 2018; Received in revised form 12 February 2020; Accepted 19 March 2020
Available online 29 December 2020
2212-571X/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Gon
of ‘localhood’ is the new frontier of destination marketing, where
“everyone is becoming a local everywhere” (Volgger, 2019, p. 1) and
local experiences are co-created on-site between residents and tourists
(http://localhood.wonderfulcopenhagen.dk). More than ever before,
destinations compete on their distinctive local offer (Russo & Richards,
2016) and “design as a way of thinking” should guide destination
managers in the experience creation (Fesenmaier & Xiang, 2017, p. 8).
To design and deliver local experiences, updated fields of analysis and
methodological innovation are constantly required (Aho, 2001; Kim &
Fesenmaier, 2017). Furthermore, Russo and Richards (2016) call for a
new interpretation of ‘local in tourism’, according to the social media
shift in communication. Indeed, social media is considered to be a
realistic source of information and a meaningful tool in tourism research
(Hays, Page, & Buhalis, 2013; Zeng & Gerritsen, 2014b), since it collects
data from billions of users, whose knowledge allows multiple perspec­
tives in the observation of human phenomena (Salas-Olmedo et al.,
2018; Stienmetz, 2018). However, although ‘local experience’ is the new
battlefield of tourism competition and social media is a contemporary
source of evidence-based information, only a small number of studies
have so far specifically addressed local experience through
user-generated content (Fischer, 2010; Hochman & Manovich, 2013).
Only a deep understanding of local experiences co-creation can
empower, first, experience design and, second, destination competitive
advantage (Gnoth, 2017). The digital era offers the capacity to combine
large unstructured data to provide detailed information that could guide
the design and development of experiences in tourism (Davenport,
2013). Although extensive research has been carried out on the role of
social media in tourism, the potential of user-generated content (UGC)
in experience design remains under-investigated, and this has been
recognized as a limitation to the potential of design science (Fesenmaier
& Xiang, 2017).
To help address the gap, this paper explores ‘local experience’ in the
social media environment, as an innovative basis upon which experi­
ences can be understood and designed by destinations. The aim of this
research is to investigate what and who is associated with ‘local’ and
‘local experience’ both in the academic literature and in the social media
environment, in accordance with the design principle that ‘everyone can
– and does – design’ (Cross, 2011). Who and what is associated to ex­
periences in social media is still an open question (Tussyadiah, 2014)
and, by answering this question, the potential of social media analysis
will be further explored (Leung et al., 2013; Xiang & Gretzel, 2010). In
order to understand how UGC can support local experience design
(Fesenmaier & Xiang, 2017; Tussyadiah, 2014, 2017), Instagram was
selected as social media data source and text-based analysis was con­
ducted (Highfield & Leaver, 2015; Manikonda et al., 2014). Instagram is
one of the most popular social media platforms in the world
(https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019) and it has been
employed by previous investigations on local experience (Fischer, 2010;
Hochman & Manovich, 2013).
The paper is organized as follows. The first section reviews the
concepts of ‘local’ and ‘local experience’ in the tourism literature. The
second part focuses on local experience as an object of investigation in
the social media environment. The methodological chapter details the
mixed method that is employed, describing the tools used to identify
quantitative patterns and perform qualitative analysis. The fourth sec­
tion presents the results of what and who is associated to local experi­
ence, based on Instagram text data (hashtags, posts, comments and user
profile information). The discussion part details how UGC content
analysis provides new knowledge and a holistic understanding of local
and local experiences, upon which destination managers can design
experiences to attract tourists. The paper then presents its contributions
and limitations linked to the exploratory nature of the research. Both
theoretical and practical contributions to tourism experience design and
destination management are derived from the analysis of Instagram data
and research based on hashtags (i.e., #local* and #localexperience*).
Finally, further research is advocated on the text-based analysis
2
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435
presented to enhance result comparison among digital platforms (e.g.
Instagram, Twitter and Facebook) and innovation in social media
research.
2. Literature review
2.1. Local and local experiences
‘Local’ is a complex concept linked to the idea of place, people and
products as a combination of setting, interaction and resources. The
adjective ‘local’ is commonly used to qualify and brand products, places,
people, and refers to associated memories of experiences and emotions,
which can be recalled even later, back home (Clark & Chamber, 2007;
Freire, 2009).
The academic discussion around ‘local’ and similar sounding terms
(e.g. locality, localities, locale) dates back to the 1980s. The debate has
involved several scholars including geographers, anthropologists and
social scientists, who have tried to define ‘local’ within spatial bound­
aries, social interactions, resources and settings. Scholars have
concluded that no clear boundaries can be drawn, since the idea of what
and who is local varies from person to person, according to subjective
perspectives of space, time and social relations and “what seems a
relatively simple notion of the ‘local’, is in fact really complex and in­
volves analysis of a mixture of social and spatial processes” (Urry, 1987,
p. 443). The variety of meanings and uses ascribed to ‘local’ is still vast
and Urry’s call for greater understanding of what is meant by “the local”
(Urry, 1987, p. 443) is still contemporary to the debate in the social
sciences (Allen & Hinrichs, 2007). With reference to studies and
research in the tourism field, Hall defines “local” as “both a scale of
analysis and the characteristics which are associated with a particular
neighborhood, community, location, place or area.” (Hall in Jafari,
2002, p. 360), associating them with something unique which cannot be
found elsewhere (Freire, 2009). The qualifier ‘local’ has been widely
used in literature to refer to both products and people, including aca­
demic work on food-based tourism (Henderson, 2009) and community
studies (Beeton, 2006; Jamal & Getz, 1995). At the same time, ‘local’ has
become a frequently used label for destination marketing and place
promotion (Russo & Richards, 2016). Marketing in tourism works to
develop a unique selling proposition based on the association of places
with iconic products and storytelling about people and traditions. This
contributes both to reinforce the local identity (Everett & Aitchison,
2008) and to promote destination visibility, attracting visitors to come
and live out the local experience (Warnaby & Medway, 2013). Accord­
ing to Russo and Richards (2016) ‘local’ has to be read in terms of new
tourism products and co-created tourism experience and it is the com­
bination of the physical setting and the social milieu that facilitates the
local experience (Warnaby & Medday, 2013).
In the literature, ’experiences’ are characterized as complex in­
teractions between people and places, subjectively produced as each
individual understands and interprets experiences differently (Pine &
Gilmore, 1998, 2011). Experiences are the drivers of tourism consumer
behavior and the pillars of the experience economy (Pine & Gilmore,
2011; Quan & Wang 2004). Tourist behavior is said to be shifting from a
product-based attitude ‘buy local and eat local products’ towards an
experience based on ‘sharing with locals’ and ‘experience the local’
(Heo, 2016; Paulauskaite et al., 2017).
2.2. Local experiences and local products
Tourists have always experienced the destination by eating, drinking
and buying local products. They create linkages with local people, cul­
ture and traditions by meeting, socializing and interacting with resi­
dents. Urry (1992) and Wang (1999) argued that tourists look for
‘typical’ signs of place which, according to own perceptions, are iconic
goods that embody the major form of local culture and identity (Everett
& Aitchison, 2008; Sims, 2009, 2013, p. 475). As a result, visitors are
M. Gon
likely to try these products during their holiday: they engage with local
traditions, try food specialties, mix with locals to get a sense of place and
better know the hosting community. Indeed, literature has recognized
that “food is an important tourist attraction in an assortment of forms
and enhances or is central to the visitor experience” (Henderson, 2009,
p. 317). Sims confirmed that local food is a valuable souvenir and, even
more, an informed choice visitors make while on holiday to “taste a
place” in order to get better insights into the nature of the destination
and live out the local authentic experience (Sims, 2013, p. 329). Morris
and Buller (2003) defined local food either in terms of food specialty, as
in the value added to a product to be sold, or in terms of a bounded
region within which products are produced and sold. However, empir­
ical studies have confirmed that tourist operators, food producers and
stakeholders of the same destination rarely agree on the geographical
extent of the area identifiable as ‘local’ (Sims, 2013, p. 475). Studies
have confirmed that local goods and products connect tourists with local
people and destinations and these connections are powerful parts of the
tourism experience (Clark & Chabrel, 2007). Thus, by experiencing what
is promoted as local, tourists can connect deeply with people and places
(Clark & Chamber, 2007), and enjoy the local experience (Sims, 2009,
2013, p. 475). This is based on the reputation of local goods: they are
considered of high quality (e.g. fresh, healthy, better tasting local food),
environmentally sustainable (i.e. by reducing carbon footprints and
supply chains) and supporting the local economy (i.e. providing job
opportunities for local people, supporting revenue and incomes). At the
same time, ‘local’ goods, food, drinks and crafts are considered to be the
output of the culture, heritage, identity, local traditions and history of
destinations and their communities (Allen & Hinrichs, 2007; Sims, 2013,
p. 475).
2.3. Local experience and local communities
According to Beeton’s (2006) definition of local communities as
destination communities, the terms ’locals’, ’residents’, ‘host commu­
nities’ and ‘local communities’ can be treated as synonyms and will be
used interchangeably in the present paper. Previous literature has
identified residents as a key element of place branding (Braun, Kavar­
atzis, & Zenker, 2013) and destination promotion (Freire, 2009). Locals
are both ambassadors and co-creators of destination brand and reputa­
tion, based on their everyday behavior and community attributes such as
social bonding and business creativity (Merrilees et al., 2009). Similarly,
they are actively involved in the co-creation tourism experience with
visitors through collaborative experiences, interacting workshops, or
simply sharing destination spaces, facilities and infrastructures (Bink­
horst & Den Dekker, 2009; Chathoth, Ungson, Harrington, & Chan,
2016). Tourists look for communities as the ‘real’ destination of their
travel and, according to Braun et al. (2013) “residents are the bread and
butter of places”. Moreover “there is increasing recognition of the
intrinsic role that the host community (or destination community) plays
in the creation and delivery of tourism experiences” (Beeton, 2006, p.
16) which is heavily affected by residents’ attitudes. Locals can make or
break the experience for visitors: their perceived willingness to help the
others, talk with visitors and spend time with them are crucial charac­
teristics of local people in the evaluation of destination. As such, they
impact on positive word of mouth and willingness to visit again (Freire,
2009).
Both the experience and the collaborative economies are enlarging
the opportunities for visitors to meet residents and co-create experiences
together. Online players have structured their success on selling local
experiences, supporting new forms of entrepreneurship based on the
peer to peer economy and human relationship between residents and
tourists (Guttentag, 2015; Heo, 2016; Paulauskaite et al., 2017). Desti­
nation marketing strategies are investing and promoting the quality of
human relations within destinations, mainly between local communities
and tourists who constantly co-create local experiences and actively
contribute to the ‘shared sense of localhood’. The term ‘localhood’ was
3
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435
used for the first time in the marketing strategy of Copenhagen (Volgger,
2019). It refers to tourist and residents’ relations as the focal point of
co-created local experiences which can provide benefits to both local
community and visitors (http://localhood.wonderfulcopenhagen.dk).
2.4. Local experience, social media and experience design
Russo and Richards (2016) specifically addressed the need to inter­
pret ‘local in tourism’ according to the co-creation process and the social
media shift. Despite the ubiquity of social media, only a few academic
works have contributed to the analysis of local experiences in the social
media environment, among which are Fischer (2010) and Hochman and
Manovich (2013). The first author compared geolocated posts uploaded
on social media (i.e. Instagram, Facebook and Twitter), by both locals
and tourists, in well-known tourism destinations. Results showed that
tourists tend to post user generated content (UGC) in areas close to the
destination center and major tourist attractions, while residents rather
post in the destination outskirts, overlapping only in limited shared
areas. In addition, Hochman and Manovich (2013) developed a specific
‘reading of the local through social media’ by analyzing photographs
uploaded on Instagram. According to their analysis, ‘local’ is a socially
constructed term, defined by people’s experiences rather than the
immanent qualities of products or the physical characteristics of places
or people. They showed that tourists and residents, posting and sharing
data on Instagram, are constantly co-creating and reshaping the mean­
ing of local. Social media users constantly upload and share UGC of their
personal experiences and check on peers’ posts to gain information and
support their decision process. This is even more significant in tourism,
where social media affects tourists’ emotions, experiences (Hays et al.,
2013; Xiang & Gretzel, 2010; Zeng & Gerritsen, 2014) and overall
behavior. Sigala (2016) reinforced the idea that tourism experiences are
co-created on social media. Tussyadiah (2014) underlined the relevance
of design thinking in the process of creating experience within desti­
nations. Design thinking is increasingly applied in tourism management
in the areas of destination design and place planning (Dredge, 1999),
product and service development (Hjalager, 2010; Zehrer, 2009),
experience design (Tussyadiah, 2014) and design science (Fesenmaier &
Xiang, 2017). Design thinking helps destinations to be more innovative,
better differentiate their brands, and bring their products and services to
market faster (Brown, 2009). More specifically, experience design has
become decisive in increasing tourism destination competitiveness and
enhancing destination management (Kim & Fesenmaier, 2017). Design
thinking implies a human-centered innovation where consumers, de­
signers and managers interact in a collaborative environment toward a
holistic experience concept (Tussyadiah, 2014, 2017). Social media is a
human-centered interactive environment that can contribute to the
holistic experience design, based on user generated content data about
local experiences. In addition, information and communication tech­
nologies (ICTs) have already been integrated into destination place
design (Dredge, 1999) and tourism experience design as tools, methods,
artifacts, end products and triggers for tourist behavior (Tussyadiah,
2017). However, a specific focus on UGC is still needed to understand
social media contribution to design thinking.
Social media has been considered to be a significant source of in­
formation for research in tourism (Hays et al., 2013; Jabreel et al., 2017;
Marine-Roig & Clavé, 2015; Sigala et al., 2012; Xiang & Gretzel, 2010).
UGC analysis has a number of advantages as a research mode, including
data availability and “its use as a non-intrusive source that lacks the
complications associated with direct interactions with human subjects”
(Lu & Stepchenkova, 2015, p. 4). Textual UGC and content analysis are
the leading type of data analysis and research method employed
respectively. This has driven attention to a few social media platforms (i.
e. Twitter and Facebook), limiting both comparisons among social
media and their overall potential as information sources. However, the
distribution and sheer amount of UGC data available present method­
ological challenges in collecting, organizing, and analyzing the bulk of
M. Gon
this material in a quantifiable, time-efficient, and ethical manner. In
addition, “the questions of whom UGC represents, and what the
boundaries for generalizability of results are, are still open” (Lu &
Stepchenkova, 2015, p. 4).
To help address the above gaps and answering the call for capturing
experiences from secondary data mining in social media (Tussyadiah,
2014), the present paper investigates local experience using UGC as a
support to experience design at destination level. Two research ques­
tions guided this explorative study:
1) What is associated to local and local experiences in the social media
discussion?
2) Who is related to local experience discussion on social media?
To answer these questions, the paper presents a methodology that
extracts meaningful information from UGC as the basis for a holistic
understanding of tourism experience design. Coherently with the work
of Hochman and Manovich (2013), Instagram was chosen as source of
data for this research. Since its launch in October 2010, Instagram has
provided users with an instantaneous way to share everyday life mo­
ments, becoming one of the most popular social media platforms in the
world (https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019). Despite its
popularity, little research has so far been conducted on Instagram. This
is because textual content has dominated social media research, thanks
to the ease of collecting and processing text in comparison to images.
Instagram is commonly perceived as an “image sharing platform”, while
in reality, users always post photographs and videos associated to
hashtags, titles and short comments (Hu et al., 2014). While the content
of the different social media platforms may be dissimilar, there are some
architectural parallels that encourage comparisons among them (High­
field & Leaver, 2015), specifically the shared use of hashtags to create
and joint online discussions and communities (Hu et al., 2014). Never­
theless, Instagram’s potential for fostering research based on the anal­
ysis of hashtags, comments, image titles and user profiles, remains
under-investigated (Hu et al., 2014). The present paper employs a
text-based analysis of Instagram posts (Highfield & Leaver, 2015) to
complement previous studies on local experience based on geolocalized
images (Hochman & Manovich, 2013) and to foster both research into
experience design and social media as an innovative field of analysis.
Table 1
Methodology structure and corresponding research questions. Author elaboration.
4
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435
3. Methodology
Based on Tussyadiah’s (2014) call for capturing experiences from
online secondary data and data mining of experiences stored in blogs
and social media, the present paper introduces a method to track, collect
and analyze Instagram textual data. The research combines mixed
method tools (i.e. Data Miner, Webstagram and Leximancer) to identify
quantitative patterns based on hashtags and to perform qualitative
content analysis (He et al., 2013; Singh et al., 2007) of UGC data
uploaded by Instagram users (Jabreel et al., 2017), according to the
approach of Highfield and Leaver (2015). In particular, the method is
structured into different phases. Firstly, data were collected and
extracted based on hashtag selection: #local* (Phase 1) and #local­
experience* (Phase 2a). Secondly, the data associated to #local­
experience* was analyzed with Leximancer software (Phase 2b).
Thirdly, the Instagram accounts-holders who mainly posted pictures
with the #localexperience* or presented the keyword ‘localexperience’
in user names, image titles or comments were identified and categorized
(Phase 3). As in previous studies, only Instagram posts in English were
selected for the content analysis.
Table 1 summarizes the different phases and the related outputs, in
relation to the research questions.
3.1. Social media used in the study
Instagram was chosen as data source in accordance with previous
studies on local experiences based on large-scale analysis of images from
destinations (Fischer, 2010; Hochman & Manovich, 2013). Further­
more, Instagram accounts for more than one billion monthly active users
around the world and it is representative of worldwide population
(https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019). Lastly, Insta­
gram combines the evocative potential of photographs with short
meaningful text content, primarily in the form of hashtags, image titles,
comments and user profile information. In 2014 further investigation
was advocated on the Instagram social media platform in enhancing
research based on content analysis (Hu et al., 2014). Lu and Stepchen­
kova called for innovative methods to support the comparisons of results
between social media (i.e. Facebook and Twitter), thus reinforcing their
potential as a source of evidence (Lu & Stepchenkova, 2015). Highfield
and Leaver developed, in 2015, a method for textual content analysis
based on hashtags on Instagram and adapted from previous Twitter
M. Gon
social media research. In line with Highfield and Leaver study, hashtags
act as a point of departure in the present work. Hashtags are UGC
composed by one or more words combined together, which can be easily
recognized by the # character in front. They allow categorizing infor­
mation according to a topic or main theme and, at the same time, they
are keywords used to follow, track and contribute to online discussions
and make posts discoverable to other social media users through
searching. Although hashtags may represent different individual in­
tentions, their use reflects peculiar social media practices, shared among
users, and are thus useful filters for defining the scope of research pro­
jects (Highfield & Leaver, 2015). On Instagram, hashtags play a key role
in searching for topics and contributing to communities’ discussion
through data that are tagged with a specific hashtag. Users usually
provide a long list of hashtags (i.e. a maximum of 30 hashtags to
comment section) in order to appear on a public timeline search and,
based on hashtags, they can identify people with similar interests and
make more connections, co-creating new knowledge. Hashtags allow
certain types of communities to emerge and form, including an ad hoc
public, in relation to a particular event or topical issue. Eventually,
frequently posted hashtags can provide indirect information about the
interests of social media users (Manikonda et al., 2014).
Fig. 1 shows an example of Instagram post, composed by an image
and some associated hashtags. Personal data and user profile informa­
tion have been intentionally cut out.
Since hashtags are the way images and videos are organized,
researched and accessed by users, they offer researchers a criterion to
study how social media users document elements of their everyday lives,
often supported by short textual information such as comments. At the
same time researchers can identify groups of users with similar interests,
gain demographic and psychographic information. Such data allows for
quantitative and qualitative analysis, although research is still in its
infancy (Highfield & Leaver, 2015; Hochman & Manovich 2013; Hu
et al., 2014).
3.2. Data collection, check and cleaning
Instagram provides open source unstructured information which can
be easily accessed, via a user profile, but which needs to be properly
extracted, organized and understood. The Instagram Application Pro­
gramming Interface (API) gives researchers access to metadata around
public content and it allows queries around user-specified tags,
providing extensive information. Besides Instagram API, there are
several tools and services, including commercial and open source freely
available applications, which support researchers in obtaining data from
social media. For the purposes of the present study open source free
versions of programs were used to perform text mining and content
analysis in Instagram data.
Text mining techniques attempt to extract meaningful information
from unstructured textual data (Cao, Duan, & Gan, 2011; He et al., 2013,
2014). Text mining is mainly data driven and its main purpose is to
automatically identify hidden patterns or trends. Applying text mining
to social media data can yield interesting findings on human behavior
and human interaction (He et al., 2013; Jabreel et al., 2017; Singh et al.,
Fig. 1. Example of an Instagram post, composed by image and associate hashtags, resulting from data mining of #local* research on Instagram. Source: https://www
.instagram.com/p/BvCyqWbFatg/.
5
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435
2007) but the large quantity of data requires automated computer
assisted techniques (Liu et al., 2011). To collect data for the present
study, text mining was conducted based on the hashtags: #local (Phase
1) and #localexperience (Phase 2a), with DataMiner (https://data
-miner.io) and Webstagram (https://web.stagram.com) software. Data­
Miner assists data extraction from any HTML web page and enables to
save the information into Google Sheets or Microsoft Excel. Further­
more, Webstagram performs like a search engine to discover Instagram
data by tags, hashtags or usernames. It allows searching the most pop­
ular hashtags associated to the user profiles (Phase 3). Only public
shared posts were accessed, in agreement to Instagram privacy policy.
Overall data was searched through the author’s personal Instagram ac­
count and collected at aggregated level, ensuring data privacy (Highfield
& Leaver, 2015). Data collection was performed between October and
December 2017. According to Liu, Cao and He (2011), extracted data
was organized into a dataset and cleaned from special characters (e.g.
non-alphabetic character and emoticons). The data were processed in
order to remove all information not related to the scope of the research
or not written in English.
3.3. Data analysis
Data associated to #localexperience*, extracted from Phase 2a, were
imported and analyzed, using Leximancer software, in Phase 2b. Lex­
imancer applies a quantitative method to conduct qualitative analysis
using its own statistics-based algorithms (Indulska, Hovorka, & Recker,
2012). While the details of the algorithms are beyond the scope of this
paper, in summary they extract relational information and semantic
meaning, transforming “lexical co-occurrence information into semantic
patterns” (Smith & Humphreys, 2006, p. 262). “Leximancer offers both
conceptual and relational analysis tools. In conceptual analysis, the
presence and frequency of concepts are established by the measurement
of the document in question, while relational analysis concentrates more
on how the concepts are related to each other within the text analyzed”
(Lupu, Brochado & Stoleriu, 2019, p. 157). “The extraction of concepts is
achieved through word association by investigating terms that indicate
meaning around a word … a lexical concept is formed when a group of
related words travels together through the text. From synonyms, ad­
jectives, proper nouns and compounds, seed concepts are formed and a
thesaurus is built” (Harwood, Gapp, & Stewart, 2015, p. 1032).
Furthermore, themes are extracted from the collection of related con­
cepts in close proximity (Harwood et al., 2015). The final output of the
analysis process is a conceptual map that displays themes and concepts
in the form of circles and dots and visually shows how they are related to
each other, whereby large circles show key themes and dots individual
concepts or key words (Sotiriadou, Brouwers, & Le, 2014). The relative
position, as well as the distance between circles and dots, demonstrates
the strength of the semantic links (Lupu et al., 2018). This means that
when two concepts are close together or overlap on the map, they have
close semantic links (He & Chen, 2014; Tseng et al., 2015). As evidenced
by previous studies in tourism research (Phi, 2019; Sotiriadou et al.,
2014; Tseng et al., 2015), Leximancer entails a high level of reliability
and reproducibility and, on this basis, it was implemented in the present
M. Gon
paper.
4. Results
The results of the analysis are presented according to the different
phases in Table 2. They refer to data collection on December 15, 2017.
4.1. What is associated to #local* on Instagram? (Results from phase 1)
A first list of hashtags was constructed based on Instagram search
with ‘local’ as a keyword in the searching string of the social media
platform.
In order to produce relevant and consistent results, only the hashtags
with more than 15,000 posts were taken into account in the analysis and
every hashtag that did not produce a minimum of 15,000 posts was
excluded. The resulting list was made up of more than 100 hashtags
which included the keyword ‘local’, and where employed for a total of
48,150,390 posts, as summarized in Table A in the appendix to the
present paper.
The most frequently used hashtag containing the word local was
#shoplocal with a total of 13,233,587 posts, while the #local ranks
second with a total of 8,880,076 posts. The two hashtags together rep­
resented nearly half of the most frequently used hashtags in describing
something or someone local, as shown in Table 2. Five more hashtags
presented a remarkable number of posts: between one and five million.
They were: #supportlocal, #eatlocal, #localbrand, #localfood and
#localbusiness, as summarized in Table 2. These results confirmed the
growing movement of support for local realities and at the same time the
strong association of the concept local with the food-eat area and
business-brand-shopping activities.
The remaining 95 hashtags, with more than 15,000 posts on
December 15, 2017, summed up to a total of 12,704,595 posts with the
seed word ‘local’ and they were clustered into the following macro
areas: products, people, places, events, experiences, news and means of
transport. Only a few tourism destinations were found in the list #local*
and they were: Sydney (#sydneylocal) and Vegas (#vegaslocal), with
more than 50,000 posts each, together with Indonesia (#local­
brandindonesia) and Jakarta (#localbrandjakarta) with 35,000 and
19,000 respectively. Interestingly Lancaster, in Pennsylvania (US), en­
ters in the top ranking with #localslovelancaster, which has been used to
describe more than 26,000 images. The hashtags #localtourist, together
with #localtourists, sum up to a total of 70,000 posts, which are largely
associated to photographs of people, places, attractions and food dishes.
The research conducted with Webstagram showed that #travel,
#food, #love, #handmade, #photography, #instagood, #christmas,
#fresh, #summer and #supportlocal were frequently combined to
#local at the time of data extracted from web.instagram.com/tag/local
(December 15, 2017).
Table 2
The most frequently used hashtag containing ‘local’ seed
word. Data collection on December 15, 2017. Author’s
elaboration.
# posts
#shoplocal 13 233 587
#local 8 880 076
#supportlocal 5 148 855
#eatlocal 3 051 527
#localbrand 2 789 092
#localfood 1 202 482
#localbusiness 1 140 176
Remains 95 #local* 12 704 595
6
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435
4.2. What is associated to #localexperience* on Instagram? (Results from
phase 2)
Results from Phase 1 revealed that the hashtag #localexperience
summed up to a total of 15,397 posts and was among the 100 most
frequently used hashtags that included the seed word ‘local’. The second
step of the research specifically addressed ‘local experiences’. Data
scraping in Phase 2a showed the existence of other similar hashtags,
used in Instagram to refer to local experiences, such as: #local­
experiences (1689 posts), #localexpert (6892 posts) and #localexperts
(4703 posts) for a total of more than 28,000 posts all together. Fig. 2
shows an example of an Instagram post resulting from data mining of
#localexperience on Instagram.
The four hashtags (#localexperience, #localexperiences, #local­
expert and #localexperts) and their 28,000 posts were analyzed with
Webstagram, to find out the strongest associations, based on the times
the hashtags were combined together by Instagram users in describing
images. Results are presented in Table 3. Based on UGC extraction on
December 15, 2017, a first connection was detected among travel,
tourism and local experiences. Some tourism destinations were associ­
ated with local experiences, such as Tibet, Thailand and the Dominican
Republic. Other destinations were more generically cited with reference
to events and attraction points (e.g. #destinationevents, #eventwright,
#eventprofs, #bestofthebay).
New topics emerged from Phase 2a: outdoor activities (e.g. walking,
hiking, whale watching and adventure), photography (e.g. photography,
national geographic) and the Instagram community interested in trav­
eling activities (e.g. #instatravel, #igtravel, #travelgram).
Furthermore, to test the preliminary results of Phase 2a, thematic
and conceptual analyses were performed with Leximancer software on
the whole bundle of textual data extracted from the 28,000 posts asso­
ciated to the above key hashtags (#localexperience, #localexperiences,
#localexpert and #localexperts). Textual data was extracted from
Instagram, using the Data Miner tool, organized into a working sheet
and inserted into Leximancer software for the content analysis of Phase
2b.
Similar words were merged and a thesaurus was generated, ac­
cording to Leximancer procedure (i.e. #localexperience and #local­
experiences were merged together, and #instatravel, #igtravel, #ig
were merged into #travelgram). In contrast to manual coding of data,
Leximancer automatically analyses text to create concepts and themes
from the uploaded data. Themes are extracted from the collection of
related concepts in close proximity and their names correspond to the
most central in meaning or most connected to the other concepts. The
resulting conceptual map, showed in Fig. 3, allows to visually under­
standing the Instagram discussion on local experience and, at the same
time, organizes the data around major themes (Harwood et al., 2015).
Fig. 3 is the output of Leximancer content analysis, which shows that
textual data associated to #localexperience* and #localexpert* in
Instagram is related to six major themes and concepts: travel (100%),
localexperiences (69%), travelgram (44%), adventure (13%), local
people (9%) and enjoy (7%). The connectivity rate percentage, in pa­
rentheses, calculates the level of closeness and connection within the
themes and reflects the importance of each of them. According to the
methodology explained above, the red bubble of travel is the most
important theme among the posts related to #localexperience. It shows
100% connectivity which means the topic is strongly linked to all the
others.
In addition, Leximancer conceptual maps allow discussion to be
focused on the resulting key concepts by putting the grey node at the
center of the bubble as the major focus of the analysis and expanding the
connection web. Fig. 4 confirms the centrality of the concept travel in
Instagram discussion about local experiences: red lines link the concept
with all the others. At the same time, the concept localexperiences pre­
sents strong linkages with all the key words, as shown by the orange
lines. This resulting map supports the deep relationship between
M. Gon Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435

Fig. 2. Example of an Instagram post composed by an image and associated hashtags, resulting from data mining of #localexperience. Personal data, user names,
biographies and pictures covered by watermarks have been intentionally left out from this example. Source: https://www.instagram.com/p/BvVs0lDAo-Z/.

traveling and local experiences. It reveals that #localexperience belongs

Table 3
Combination of #localexperience* and related hashtags. Research conducted on
Webstagram.com, December 15, 2017. Author’s elaboration.
Key hashtag Related hashtags more frequently associated
#localexperience #travel, #tibettour, #adventure, #localtibetanexperience,
#hiking, #nationalgeography, #photograph
#localexperiences #travel, #bestofthebay, #eventwright, #destinationevents,
#eventprofs, #walkingtour, #instatravel, #wanderlust,
#igtravel, #travelgram
#localexpert #realestate, #realtor, #takemetour, #thailand,
#localexperience
#localexperts #realestate, #islandtimetours, #whalewatching, #tourism,
#discover, #RepublicaDominicana
to the tourism world, as much as to tourists and visitors who enjoy
engaging in photography, as it is represented by the keyword of
travelgram.
Focusing on local people we see in Fig. 5 that the concept is associated
to localexperiences, travel, travelgram and enjoy while it is far from and un-
connected with the concept of adventure. Similar connections link the
concept enjoy to all the main themes apart from adventure. On the con­
trary, the concept adventure is related to local experience and travelgram,
as per Fig. 6.
These conceptual maps suggest two main interpretations of what is
associated to local experiences among Instagram users. It visually re­
inforces the divide between users who take photographs and create posts
focusing on adventure and open air activities, and others who address
their interest to local people and enjoying the moment.

4.3. Who contributes to local experience on Instagram? Identification of

users’ profiles (results from phase 3)

The last part of the research attempted to identify and categorize,

through web data scraper and descriptive statistics, who contributes to
local experience discussion on Instagram. With this purpose, the analysis
focused on biographical content of user profiles and, at this exploratory
stage of research, two categories of Instagram users were considered:

• users who posted images and videos using #localexperience* and

• users whose Instagram profiles included the world local experience
in their account names.

Fig. 3. Thematic and conceptual map resulting from textual analysis of Insta­
gram data associated to #localexperience*. Elaboration powered by Lex­
imancer free trial version.
Instagram allows user accounts to be differentiated based on three
categories: personal, business and creator. Furthermore, every user has a
profile with name, photo and website and can edit a personal biography
(Manikonda et al., 2014). User profiles associated to #localexperience*
were found by Webstagram, while the research on account names was

Fig. 4. Conceptual map and connections among travel, local experience and the
remaining key concepts. Elaboration powered by Leximancer, free trial version.
Fig. 5. Conceptual map and connections between local people, enjoy and the
other key concepts. Elaboration powered by Leximancer, free trial version.

7
M. Gon
Fig. 6. Conceptual map and connections among adventure and the other key
concepts. Elaboration powered by Leximancer, free trial version.
directly performed on Instagram search bar. Data Miner supported data
extraction from user profiles and information was organized into a
dataset for descriptive statistics. Based on type of accounts and UGC
information provided (e.g. tour guide, travel blogger, vacation home
rental, organization or local restaurant), results revealed that, on
December 15, 2017, users who posted with the #localexprience* were
largely tourism businesses (55%) (e.g. explore_tibet, winestronaut
slovenia wine tours, takemetour_thailand, locogringo_mexico) and
tourism bloggers (25%). A similar situation could be found within the
Instagram account profiles whose names included ‘local experience’.
Despite two single cases of local communities (i.e. localyouthexperience
of Alberta in Canada and the.local.experience.llc in California), the
remaining accounts belonged to business activities or small entrepre­
neurs who promoted tourism events, guided tours and hospitality to
tourists looking for alternative ways of experiencing destinations (e.g.
‘Ashisrck - suggest Japan local experience’, ‘Lombokwatersports -
experience Lombok like a local’, ‘Guido_tragustoegiusto - local food
travel experience’, ‘Balcanicbg - Balcanic: local experiences’, ‘Slocally -
Slovenia Local Experiences’, etc).
5. Discussion
This exploratory analysis aimed to contribute to experience design
by enhancing the understanding of ‘what’ and ‘who’ can be identified as
‘local’ and ‘local experience’, searching into the social media discussion.
Instagram textual data analysis suggests that the hastag ’#local’ was
associated with support for local community, engagement with local
businesses and entrepreneurial activities (#supportlocal, #shoplocal,
#eatlocal, #localbusiness, #localfood, #localbrand). The results
contribute to the academic debate answering Urry’s call for in-depth
understanding, expanding the existing topics with economic insights
and entrepreneurial dimensions associated to the #local. The hashtag
’#localexperience’ was in the list of the 100 top-ranking #local*
hastages since it was associated to more than 15,000 posts on December
15, 2017. Results from data collection and content analysis performed
using Leximancer suggested that Instagram users associated the ‘local
experience’ discussion with traveling. In turn, the ‘traveling’ theme
leads to two major thematic areas: adventure and outdoor activities, on
one side, and local people and enjoyable moments on the other. These
results are visually represented into a thematic and conceptual map,
which supports a complexity reduction around the term local experience
and provides new insights for experience design based on UGC. Further
investigation explored Instagram users related to local experiences, in
agreement with Tussyadiah’s idea of design thinking as a human-
centered innovation where people co-create. On December 15, 2017,
tourism businesses (55%) and tourism bloggers (25%) were found to be
the majority of users contributing with their UGC to ‘local experience’
discussion on Instagram. The combined analysis suggests that #local­
experience is largely used by the tourism and travel sectors, for
8
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435
commercial and marketing purposes. The impressive number of posts
pertaining to #local* resulting from Phase 1 may convey that the large
majority of social media users would rather use hashtags different from
#localexperience to refer to their everyday life in their usual
environment.
Overall results answer to Gnoth’s (2017) call for a deeper under­
standing of ‘local experience’ co-creation by providing new insights
from the textual analysis of Instagram data. The literature review
associated ‘local experiences’ to products, services and people, while the
UGC analysis added the new concept of activities as a key dimension of
the local experiences. Activities take place within the destination envi­
ronment (e.g. hiking, walking, destination events and whale watching),
and are co-created with the local communities in the context of trav­
eling. The co-creation is documented both visually (i.e. images and
videos) and textually (i.e. hashtags, comments and likes) on Instagram
by social media users and it is associated to a positive sentiment (i.e.
enjoy). These results contribute to a holistic view and provide new in­
sights to both understand and design local experiences, as an important
contribution to marketing strategies in destination competitiveness.
6. Conclusions
Local experience is based on the broader concept of ‘local’, which is
widely used in contemporary destination marketing. Locals and local
experiences are the main attractions of destinations and tourists are in
constant search for the ‘local atmosphere’ (Tussyadiah & Pesonen,
2016a, b) and a ‘shared sense of localhood’ rooted in communities
(Volgger, 2019; Warnaby & Medway, 2013) Destination management is
facing hard times in providing the best local experience and design
science supports destinations in this process, by providing a framework
for improving experiences (Kim & Fesenmaier, 2017). Social media
platforms are virtual containers of people’s experiences and they
represent an innovative field of analysis for knowledge generation, upon
which tourism design science can rely for better design of future local
experiences (Tussyadiah, 2014, 2017). However, the quantity and
quality of UGC calls for innovative methods that support data mining,
data analysis and the comparison of results among social media plat­
forms (Lu & Stepchenkova, 2015). The present paper aims to contribute
to tourism-experience design by exploring the concept of local experi­
ences based on textual analysis of UGC posted on Instagram. It provides
theoretical, methodological and practical contributions to tourism
experience design and text-based social media analysis for research
purposes.
Findings support the literature on local and local experiences and
enrich the discussion with new insights associated to the ‘what’ and
‘who’ resulting from the analysis of hashtags, user profiles and com­
ments on Instagram. The role of local people was identified as central in
local experiences both by literature and social media analysis.
Conversely, the literature review and social media textual analysis re­
sults differ in recognizing local products and services on the one side,
and activities and adventure on the other, as focal in local experience
discussion. By doing so, the present research explores the potential of
UGC and social media in supporting the understanding of experiences
and providing new knowledge to design science. These findings
contribute to the experience design theory in addressing tourism expe­
rience co-creation process into local community interaction and outdoor
activities between travelers and locals. Instagram data analysis reveals
that, on December 15, 2017, tourism businesses and bloggers were
employing the term ‘local experience’ mainly for digital communication
strategies.
Furthermore, the present paper develops a method that combines
different tools (i.e. Data Miner, Webstagram and Leximancer) to support
text mining and content analysis of UGC data uploaded by Instagram
users. The text analysis method presented complements previous visual
geo-referenced data studies (Hochman & Manovich, 2013), contributing
to a holistic understanding of local experiencing and enhancing the
M. Gon Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435

potential of Instagram as source of evidence. Furthermore this study
fosters the research on Instagram as data source, since its growing
relevance among social media platforms and its wide use in marketing
and advertising (https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019).
The method presented in this paper can be replicated to include and
promote research across other social media platforms, thanks to the
presence of shared content elements, such as hashtags, and fixing a
common ground of textual analysis for results comparison (Highfield &
Leaver, 2015).
The paper, however, has some limitations. First, it is exploratory in
nature and results describe local experience based on text UGC on the
Instagram social media platform as per data mining on December 15,
2017. Although Instagram is one of the most-used social media in the
world, users tend to be below 50 years of age and, therefore, age de­
mographics together with privacy settings of user profiles may affect
results representativeness. Though it should be noted that the hastag
’#local*’ research produced an impressive quantity of results, #local­
experience was one of the less common among Instagram users and it
was primarily associated to tourism businesses and bloggers. Secondly,
further research is needed to complete the local experience picture, by
expanding the research to other social media platforms (i.e. Facebook
and Twitter). Research should be repeated over time, both data mining
and data analysis, to compare results within longitudinal approaches,
thus supporting local experience design with updated topics and new
trends. Nevertheless, the paper contributes to a better understanding of
local experience co-creation (Gnoth, 2017) on Instagram social media
and it presents a mixed method that can be used both by researchers and
practitioners in collecting and analyzing data from the social media as
the basis for tourism design of experiences.
Practical implications for designing local experiences at destinations
could use the resulting information in two possible ways: by focusing on
the relationship and interactions between tourists and local people on
the one side, and by investing into outdoor activities and local adven­
tures to attract tourists on the other. The social media results show that
local experience design needs to be enhanced by products or services
consumption based on the dynamic processes of human interaction and
the active experiencing of places.
Authorship contribution statement
Marika Gon: Conceptualization, Data curation, Methodology, Formal
analysis, Writing – review & editing.
Acknowledgement
The author is indebted to the Editor, the Guest Editors and the
anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and constructive
feedback.

APPENDIX
Table 1
List of # local seed whit more than 15.000 posts. Own research on Instagram, December 15.

# post ref

#shoplocal 13233587 #shoplocal13.233.587 post

#local 8880076 #local8.880.076 post
#supportlocal 5148855 #supportlocal5.148.855 post
#eatlocal 3051527 #eatlocal3.051.527 post
#localbrand 2789092 #localbrand2.789.092 post
#localfood 1202482 #localfood1.202.482 post
#localbusiness 1140176 #localbusiness1.140.176 post
#localartist 657066 #localartist657.066 post
#localmusic 620971 #localmusic620.971 post
#supportlocalbusiness 615867 #supportlocalbusiness615.867 post
#sydneylocal 549945 #sydneylocal549.945 post
#localart 540479 #localart540.479 post
#locals 532474 #locals532.474 post
#vegaslocal 506804 #vegaslocal506.804 post
#supportlocalartists 497055 #supportlocalartists497.055 post
#consumelocal 479223 #consumelocal479.223 post
#localbrandindonesia 358009 #localbrandindonesia358.009 post
#localbrandid 339812 #localbrandid339.812 post
#localsmd 334623 localsmd334.623 post
#locallove 332565 #locallove332.565 post
#local3 322036 #local322.036 post
#locallymade 291953 #locallymade291.953 post
#localbeer 291183 #localbeer291.183 post
#localproduce 288742 #localproduce288.742 post
#localsonly 284901 #localsonly284.900 post
#localproduct 278873 #localproduct278.873 post
#locallygrown 232264 #locallygrown232.264 post
#localeats 221712 #localeats221.712 post
#local1 216979 #local1216.979 post
#localartists 187244 #localartists187.244 post
#localtalent 133254 #localtalent133.254 post
#localvape 126022 #localvape126.022 post
#localband 122163 #localband122.163 post
#locallysourced 111941 #locallysourced111.941 post
#locales 104464 #locales104.464 post
#localmarket 99041 #localmarket99.041 post
#locallife 99031 #locallife99.031 post
#localdesigner 98283 #localdesigner98.283 post
#localbrew 95662 #localbrew95.662 post
#localcoffee 94463 #localcoffee94.463 post
(continued on next page)

9
M. Gon Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435

Table 1 (continued )
# post ref

#localguides 88522 #localguides88.522 post

#locallyowned 87197 #locallyowned87.197 post
#localshop 85549 #localshop85.549 post
#localbands 82334 #localbands82.334 post
#localmade 80549 #localmade80.549 post
#localhoney 75401 #localhoney75.400 post
#locale 72739 #locale72.739 post
#localislekker 71534 #localislekker71.534 post
#localflowers 66173 #localflowers66.173 post
#localnatives 63541 #localnatives63.541 post
#localtourist 62999 #localtourist62.999 post
#localiiz 62238 #localiiz62.238 post
#localbrands 61573 #localbrands61.573 post
#localbrandindo 61195 #localbrandindo61.195 post
#localsknow 60323 #localsknow60.323 post
#localdesign 57658 #localdesign57.658 post
#localnews 52775 #localnews52.775 post
#localglass 51593 #localglass51.593 post
#localfoods 50398 #localfoods50.398 post
#localaz 48988 #localaz48.988 post
#locallyhated 48352 #locallyhated48.352 post
#localheroes 47403 #localheroes47.403 post
#localfashion 46097 #localfashion46.097 post
#localhero 44455 #localhero44.455 post
#localfarms 44079 #localfarms44.079 post
#localphotographer 43704 #localphotographer43.704 post
#localbar 43621 #localbar43.621 post
#localfarmers 41545 #localfarmers41.545 post
#localhistory 40913 #localhistory40.913 post
#localgrown 40588 #localgrown40.588 post
#localscan 39731 #localscan39.730 post
#localcafe 39369 #localcafe39.369 post
#localingredients 35402 #localingredients35.402 post
#localwine 35159 #localwine35.159 post
#locali 35014 #locali35.014 post
#localpub 34552 #localpub34.552 post
#localbrandbandung 34448 #localbrandbandung34.448 post
#localfarm 33875 #localfarm33.875 post
#localbiz 33291 #localbiz33.291 post
#localfollowtrick 33131 #localfollowtrick33.130 post
#localspot 32566 #localspot32.566 post
#locallens 31628 #locallens31.628 post
#localescomerciales 27301 #localescomerciales27.301 post
#localculture 26334 #localculture26.334 post
#localslovelancaster 26131 #localslovelancaster26.131 post
#localwolves 25725 #localwolves25.725 post
#localfruit 25631 #localfruit25.631 post
#localph 25413 #localph25.413 post
#localvore 24811 #localvore24.800 post
#localisthenewblack 24718 #localisthenewblack24.718 post
#locally 24533 #locally24.533 post
#localstore 24489 #localstore24.489 post
#local710 20775 #local71020.775 post
#localtaste 20298 #localtaste20.298 post
#localgoods 19717 #localgoods19.717 post
#localboy 19653 #localboy19.653 post
#localbrandjakarta 19138 #localbrandjakarta19.138 post
#localcraft 18595 #localcraft18.595 post
#localcommunity 17351 #localcommunity17351post
#local600 15763 #local60015.763 post
#localoca 15516 #localoca15.516 post
#localexperience 15397 #localexperience15397post
TOTAL 48150390

References
Aho, S. K. (2001). Towards a general theory of touristic experiences: Modelling
experience process in tourism. Tourism Review, 56(3/4), 33–37.
Allen, P., & Hinrichs, C. (2007). Buying into’Buy local’: Engagements of United States
local food initiatives’. In D. Maye, L. Holloways, & M. Kneafsy (Eds.), Alternative food
geographies: Representation and practice (pp. 255–272). Oxford: Elsevier.
Beeton, S. (2006). Community development through tourism. Collingwood: Landlinks Press.
Binkhorst, E., & Den Dekker, T. (2009). Agenda for co-creation tourism experience
research. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2–3), 311–327.
Braun, E., Kavaratzis, M., & Zenker, S. (2013). My city – my brand: The different roles of
residents in place branding. Journal of Place Management and Development, 6(1),
18–28.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design. How design thinking transforms organizations and
inspires innovation. Harper Collins.
Cao, Q., Duan, W., & Gan, Q. (2011). Exploring determinants of voting for the
’helpfulness’ of online user reviews: A text mining approach. Decision Support
Systems, 50(2), 511–521.
Chathoth, P. K., Ungson, G. R., Harrington, R. H., & Chan, E. S. W. (2016). Co-creation
and higher order customer engagement in hospitality and tourism services: A critical
review. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(2),
222–245.

10
M. Gon
Clark, G., & Chabrel, M. (2007). Measuring integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies,
9(4), 371–386.
Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Oxford, New
York, NY: Berg.
Davenport, T. H. (2013). Analytics 3.0. Harvard Business Review, 91(12), 64–72.
Dredge, D. (1999). Destination place planning and design. Annals of Tourism Research, 26
(4), 772–791.
Dredge, D., & Gyimóthy, S. (2015). The collaborative economy and tourism: Critical
perspectives, questionable claims and silenced voices. Tourism Recreation Research,
40(3), 286–302.
Dredge, D., & Gyimóthy, S. (2017). Collaborative economy and tourism. In D. Dredge, &
S. Gyimóthy (Eds.), Collaborative economy and tourism (pp. 1–12). Cham: Springer
International Publishing.
Du Rand, G. E., & Heath, E. (2006). Towards a framework for food tourism as an element
of destination marketing. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(3), 206–234.
Everett, S., & Aitchison, C. (2008). The role of food tourism in sustaining regional
identity: A case study of Cornwall, South west England. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 16(2), 150–167.
Fesenmaier, D. R., & Xiang, Z. (Eds.). (2017). Design science in tourism: Foundations of
destination management. Cham: Springer.
Fischer, E. (2010). Local and tourists. https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/
72157624209158632. (Accessed 15 September 2017).
Freire, J. R. (2009). ‘Local People’ a critical dimension for place brands. Journal of Brand
Management, 16(7), 420–438.
Gnoth, J. (2017). Destinations and value co-creation: Designing experiences as processes.
In D. R. Fesenmaier, & X. Zheng (Eds.), Design science in tourism (pp. 125–138).
Cham: Springer.
Guttentag, D. (2015). Airbnb: Disruptive innovation and the rise of an informal tourism
accommodation sector. Current Issues in Tourism, 18(12), 1192–1217.
Hampton, M. P. (2005). Heritage, local communities and economic development. Annals
of Tourism Research, 32(3), 735–759.
Harwood, I. A., Gapp, R., & Stewart, H. (2015). Cross-check for completeness: Exploring
a novel use of Leximancer in a grounded theory study. Qualitative Report, 20(7),
1029–1045.
Hays, S., Page, S. J., & Buhalis, D. (2013). Social media as a destination marketing tool:
Its use by national tourism organisations. Current Issues in Tourism, 16(3), 211–239.
He, W., & Chen, Y. (2014). Using blog mining as an analytical method to study the use of
social media by small businesses. Journal of Information Technology Case and
Application Research, 16(2), 91–104.
Henderson, J. C. (2009). Food tourism reviewed. British Food Journal, 111(4), 317–326.
Heo, C. Y. (2016). Sharing economy and prospects in tourism research. Annals of Tourism
Research, 58(C), 166–170.
He, W., Zha, S., & Li, L. (2013). Social media competitive analysis and text mining: A case
study in the pizza industry. International Journal of Information Management, 33(3),
464–472.
Highfield, T., & Leaver, T. (2015). A methodology for mapping Instagram hashtags. First
Monday, 20(1), 1–11.
Hjalager, A.-M. (2010). A review of innovation research in tourism. Tourism Management,
31(1), 1–12.
Hochman, N., & Manovich, L. (2013). Zooming into an Instagram city: Reading the local
through social media. First Monday, 18(7).
Hultman, J., & Hall, C. M. (2012). Tourism place-making: Governance of locality in
Sweden. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 547–570.
Hu, Y., Manikonda, L., & Kambhampati, S. (2014). May). What we instagram: A first
analysis of Instagram photo content and user types. In Eighth International AAAI
conference on weblogs and social media.
Indulska, M., Hovorka, D. S., & Recker, J. (2012). Quantitative approaches to content
analysis: Identifying conceptual drift across publication outlets. European Journal of
Information Systems, 21(1), 49–69.
Jabreel, M., Moreno, A., & Huertas, A. (2017). Do local residents and visitors Express the
same sentiments on destinations through social media?. In Information and
communication technologies in tourism 2017 (pp. 655–668). Cham: Springer.
Jafari, J. (Ed.). (2002). Encyclopedia of tourism. Routledge.
Jamal, T., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning.
Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 186–204.
Kim, J. J., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2017). Tourism experience and tourism design. In
D. R. Fesenmaier, & X. Zhen (Eds.), Design science in tourism (pp. 17–29). Cham:
Springer.
Leung, D., Law, R., Van Hoof, H., & Buhalis, D. (2013). Social media in tourism and
hospitality: A literature review. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(1–2),
3–22.
Liu, B., Cao, S. G., & He, W. (2011). Distributed data mining for e-business. Information
Technology and Management, 12(2), 67–79.
Lupu, C., Brochado, A., & Stoleriu, O. (2019). Visitor experiences at UNESCO monasteries
in Northeast Romania. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 14(2), 150–165.
Lu, W., & Stepchenkova, S. (2015). User-generated content as a research mode in tourism
and hospitality applications: Topics, methods, and software. Journal of Hospitality
Marketing & Management, 24(2), 119–154.
Manikonda, L., Hu, Y., & Kambhampati, S. (2014). Analyzing user activities, demographics,
social network structure and user-generated content on Instagram. arXiv preprint arXiv:
1410.8099.
Marine-Roig, E., & Clavé, S. A. (2015). Tourism analytics with massive user-generated
content: A case study of Barcelona. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 4
(3), 162–172.
11
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 19 (2021) 100435
Merrilees, B., Miller, D., & Herington, C. (2009). Antecedents of residents’ city brand
attitudes. Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 362–367.
Morris, C., & Buller, H. (2003). The local food sector: A preliminary assessment of its
form and impact in gloucestershire. British Food Journal, 105(8), 559–566.
Paulauskaite, D., Powell, R., Coca-Stefaniak, J. A., & Morrison, A. M. (2017). Living like a
local: Authentic tourism experiences and the sharing economy. International Journal
of Tourism Research, 19(6), 619–628.
Phi, G. T. (2019). Framing overtourism: A critical news media analysis. Current Issues in
Tourism, 1–5.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard
Business Review, 76, 97–105.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (2011). The experience economy. Cambrid, MA: Harvard
Business Press.
Quan, S., & Wang, N. (2004). Towards a structural model of the tourist experience: An
illustration from food experiences in tourism. Tourism Management, 25(3), 297–305.
Russo, A. P., & Richards, G. (Eds.). (2016). Reinventing the local in tourism: Producing,
consuming and negotiating. Bristol: Channel View Publications.
Salas-Olmedo, M. H., Moya-Gómez, B., García-Palomares, J. C., & Gutiérrez, J. (2018).
Tourists’ digital footprint in cities: Comparing Big Data sources. Tourism
Management, 66, 13–25.
Sigala, M. (2016). Social media and the co-creation of tourism experiences. In
M. Sotiriadis, & D. Gursoy (Eds.), The handbook of managing and marketing tourism
experiences (pp. 85–111). London: Emerald Group Publishing Limites.
Sigala, M., Christou, E., & Gretzel, U. (Eds.). (2012). Social media in travel, tourism and
hospitality: Theory, practice and cases. London: Ashgate Publishing.
Sims, R. (2009). Food, place and authenticity: Local food and the sustainable tourism
experience. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(3), 321–336.
Sims, R. (2013). Food, place and authenticity: Local food and the sustainable tourism
experience. Taking Food Public: Redefining Foodways in a Changing World.
Singh, N., Hu, C., & Roehl, W. S. (2007). Text mining a decade of progress in hospitality
human resource management research: Identifying emerging thematic development.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 26(1), 131–147.
Smith, A. E., & Humphreys, M. S. (2006). Evaluation of unsupervised semantic mapping
of natural language with Leximancer concept mapping. Behavior Research Methods,
38(2), 262–279.
Sotiriadou, P., Brouwers, J., & Le, T. A. (2014). Choosing a qualitative data analysis tool:
A comparison of NVivo and leximancer. Annals of Leisure Research, 17(2), 218–234.
Stienmetz, J. L. (2018). Deconstructing visitor experiences: Structure and sentiment. In
Information and communication technologies in tourism 2018 (pp. 489–500). Cham:
Springer.
Tseng, C., Wu, B., Morrison, A. M., Zhang, J., & Chen, Y. C. (2015). Travel blogs on China
as a destination image formation agent: A qualitative analysis using leximancer.
Tourism Management, 46, 347–358.
Tussyadiah, I. P. (2014). Toward a theoretical foundation for experience design in
tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 53(5), 543–564.
Tussyadiah, I. P. (2017). Technology and behavioral design in tourism. In
D. R. Fesenmaier, & X. Zheng (Eds.), Design science in tourism (pp. 173–191). Cham:
Springer.
Tussyadiah, I. P., & Pesonen, J. (2016a). Drivers and barriers of peer-to-peer
accommodation stay: An exploratory study with American and Finnish travellers.
Current Issues in Tourism, 21(6), 703–720.
Tussyadiah, I. P., & Pesonen, J. (2016b). Impacts of peer-to-peer accommodation use on
travel patterns. Journal of Travel Research, 55(8), 1022–1040.
Urry, J. (1987). Survey 12: Society, space, and locality. Environment and Planning D:
Society and Space, 5(4), 435–444.
Urry, J. (1992). The tourist gaze “revisited”. American Behavioral Scientist, 36(2),
172–186.
Volgger, M. (2019). The end of tourism through localhood and overtourism? An
exploration of current destination governance challenges. In H. Pechlaner,
E. Innerhofer, & G. Erschbamer (Eds.), Overtourism: Tourism management and
solutions. Routledge.
Wang, N. (1999). Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Annals of Tourism
Research, 26(2), 349–370.
Warnaby, G., & Medway, D. (2013). What about the ‘place’ in place marketing?
Marketing Theory, 13(3), 345–363.
Xiang, Z., & Gretzel, U. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information search.
Tourism Management, 31(2), 179–188.
Zehrer, A. (2009). Service experience and service design: Concepts and application in
tourism SMEs. Managing Service Quality, 19(3), 332–349.
Zeng, B., & Gerritsen, R. (2014). What do we know about social media in tourism? A
review. Tourism Management Perspectives, 10, 27–36.
Web References
DATA MINER https://data-miner.io.
INSTAGRAM https://www.instagram.com.
LEXIMANCER https://info.leximancer.com.
WE ARE SOCIAL https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019.
WEBSTAGRAM https://web.stagram.com.
WONDERFUL COPENHAGEN http://localhood.wonderfulcopenhagen.dk.