69 KNOWLEDGE AT THE SERVICE OF SOCIETY: RETHINKING IMPACT IN TOURISM RESEARCH – Contributions by Verônica Mayer

The reflections presented in this chapter are rooted in my trajectory as a researcher and practitioner. Earlier in my career, I engaged in consultancy projects that introduced me to the challenges of applying knowledge in real-world settings. Later, upon joining a public university, I began coordinating and participating in research initiatives supported by government agencies and national funding institutions. These projects spanned not only tourism, but also broader areas of management, marketing, and behavioral studies—always with the goal of connecting academic knowledge with public relevance and real-world challenges.

However, it was during the pandemic years—and in the period that followed—that these ideas took on new urgency and clarity. I had the opportunity to lead and collaborate on applied research projects focused on supporting vulnerable segments of Brazilian society: family farmers, small tourism entrepreneurs, and Indigenous communities. These initiatives aimed to foster tourism not as a mere economic activity, but as a means of cultural preservation, community empowerment, and value transfer. Through co-created experiences, the projects sought not only to benefit host communities, but also to transform the perspectives of tourists, offering them meaningful, memorable encounters rooted in local knowledge, identity, and resilience.

1.    Relevance and Scientific Integrity: Challenges for Tourism Research

Tourism research has grown significantly in recent decades, generating a large volume of publications and diversified theoretical approaches. However, a recurring challenge remains: the gap between academic knowledge production and the concrete needs of society. Although publishing in high-impact journals is vital for scientific recognition, this alone does not guarantee that research will contribute to the resolution of real-world problems (Dwivedi et al., 2024).

This gap is particularly critical in Global South contexts, where social inequalities, infrastructure gaps, and fragile institutional arrangements demand urgent, evidence-based solutions. In Brazil, despite the increasing scientific output in tourism, many territories and communities still lack access to structured knowledge capable of informing policies, improving services, or enhancing local capacities.

In many cases, the challenge is not the absence of relevant research, but the limited accessibility of what is produced. Academic research has long prioritized scientific publications, and for good reason: publishing remains one of the most effective ways to advance knowledge, validate findings, and build cumulative understanding. However, the current incentive structures—often centered on metrics, rankings, and career progression—can distance researchers from the very problems their work aims to address (Benjamin, Lee, & Boluk, 2024).

Although there is growing interest in aligning academic research with practical outcomes, this expectation often overlooks the nature and purpose of scientific inquiry. As Dwivedi et al. (2024) point out, academic research is frequently criticized for its complexity, technical language, and detachment from industry or policy needs. However, asking researchers to make all scientific work palatable to broader audiences may risk downgrading the very rigor that allows knowledge to advance. It is not realistic—or even desirable—for academic journals to adopt simplified styles or communication strategies as the default. What is needed instead are complementary mechanisms: translation processes, applied projects, and intermediary outputs designed for non-academic audiences. Rather than simplifying science, we must invest in creating diverse forms of knowledge dissemination that preserve its complexity while enabling societal use​.

It is important to acknowledge that research does not always generate immediate or concrete solutions. Often, the impact of a study becomes visible only years later, when theories mature, or when conditions change. Scientific inquiry requires persistence, patience, methodological rigor, and time. Much of it is rightly focused on discovering underlying mechanisms, testing hypotheses, and refining frameworks that are not immediately applicable. But this temporal distance can be misinterpreted as disconnection from the world’s pressing needs. Moreover, even when research has clear practical implications, it is not easily understood or applied by those outside academic environments. Theoretical models, methodological complexity, and highly technical language make academic publications challenging to access for practitioners, policymakers, and communities. A certain level of scientific literacy is needed to interpret and implement these findings—but this level is not evenly distributed across sectors, especially in under-resourced territories.

If we have a relevant body of knowledge that can benefit society, but this knowledge is difficult for practitioners or policymakers to reach due to its theoretical or methodological complexity, what should we do? Should we stop producing complex research? Abandon statistics or econometrics because they are difficult to understand? Clearly, the answer is no. We cannot criticize scientific knowledge for being rigorous or for requiring time to generate results. Innovative research themes demand maturation. That is how science works.

The answer is not to oversimplify research or dilute its complexity. Rather, one possible path is to invest in thoughtful forms of translation—not only linguistic, but also epistemological and communicative. This means exploring ways to make academic knowledge more accessible and usable without compromising its rigor. As researchers, we are often well positioned to contribute to this process. Our training allows us to navigate technical language, theoretical frameworks, and methodological procedures, and to assess evidence with a critical eye. These competencies can help us identify and mobilize existing knowledge in ways that support dialogue across sectors and inform practices and policies—especially when combined with the lived experiences and insights of those in the field.

In this sense, researchers must not only produce knowledge, but also build platforms for others to walk on. Creating conditions for broader access—so that others can follow the path, walk beside us, or open new routes—is one of the most powerful contributions academia can offer to society.

2.    Knowledge at the Service of Society: Community-Engaged Research

To respond to this scenario, I propose a model of community-engaged research—or research in partnership with society—based on my own reflections and experiences in applied projects. Rather than beginning with gaps in the academic literature, this approach starts from the demands of society itself. My aim is to generate knowledge that is public, accessible, and responsive to real-world challenges—without losing methodological rigor or theoretical depth. In this model, existing scientific literature, including highly technical content, is mobilized, translated, and adapted to co-create practical and context-sensitive solutions.

Applied research projects represent, in my view, one of the most effective ways to activate this model in practice. They offer a concrete opportunity to put scientific and technical knowledge—accumulated through years of academic training—at the service of society. However, this does not mean offering pre-formulated solutions. These projects require genuine collaboration, where researchers engage with community stakeholders and institutional partners in a process of co-creation. It is through the recognition of diverse forms of knowledge, lived experiences, and shared goals that applied research can produce relevant and transformative outcomes.

In advancing this approach, it becomes essential to distinguish applied research projects from consultancy. This distinction is especially important for those of us working in public universities and in countries like Brazil, where social inequalities and institutional fragility demand long-term, collective solutions. While consulting projects typically serve private interests or short-term objectives, applied research projects aim to generate public knowledge—knowledge that is not only methodologically robust but also open, reusable, and replicable. Consultancy contracts usually result in restricted reports, designed for a specific company or administration, with no intention or legal permission for broader dissemination. These documents often become obsolete due to political turnover or shifting priorities.

By contrast, applied research projects build cumulative knowledge. They deepen understanding, foster transparency, and aim for impact that extends beyond a single moment or organization. When results are properly documented and published, they contribute both to scientific literature and to public policy. Their relevance is measured not only by their immediate utility, but by their capacity to remain accessible and useful across time and contexts.

In this sense, it is not only a way to bring knowledge to society—but also a way to give back knowledge to science. By documenting processes, testing methods, and engaging with diverse actors, applied projects produce results that inform academic debates, challenge theoretical assumptions, and open new lines of inquiry. In doing so, they help reaffirm the role of the university not only as a producer of elite knowledge, but as a partner in building collective futures.

This perspective contrasts with the dominant model of academic research, in which the starting point is often a gap in the literature rather than a social or territorial demand. While the identification of these gaps plays an important role in theoretical advancement, it can also lead to a disconnect between research and the urgent, complex problems faced by communities. The emphasis on publication metrics and standardized methodologies often reinforces a form of academic enclosure that limits the transformative potential of research (Nowotny et al., 2001).

3. Applied Research Projects in Brazil (2021–2024): The Beauty of Impact

Between 2021 and 2024, I participated in several applied research projects that illustrate how academic knowledge can be mobilized to respond to complex and urgent social challenges. These experiences, developed during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, reveal not only the methodological and logistical demands of research in the field, but also the transformative potential of co-creating knowledge with communities. The lessons learned from these projects help define a set of principles for future work committed to public impact.

3.1 Nautical Sports Tourism in Niterói-RJ

This project was developed in partnership with the City Council of Niterói, a coastal city located in the metropolitan region of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The initiative was motivated by specific local needs related to the development of nautical sports tourism. Our goal was to foster this segment as a strategy for promoting well-being, entrepreneurship, cultural identity, and sustainable economic development. The project began with a participatory diagnosis process and ongoing dialogue with local stakeholders, ensuring that the perspectives of practitioners, community members, and institutional actors were central from the start.

Based on these territorial demands, we identified relevant international knowledge in the academic literature and adapted rigorous research methodologies to guide our fieldwork. This allowed us to generate a robust and structured dataset that supported both academic investigations and the production of technical publications. The materials were made available in open formats to ensure public access and usability by different audiences^[1].

The project was built upon the expertise of experienced researchers, but also emphasized co-creation with stakeholders, training for local entrepreneurs, and the preparation of new researchers and professionals for the tourism sector. This combination of theory, territory, and collaborative capacity building reflects the type of applied research I advocate for—one that is academically grounded, socially responsive, and generative across multiple levels (Cavalheiro et al., 2022).

3.2 Rural Brazil Experiences (EBR)

The Rural Brazil Experiences (Experiências do Brasil Rural -EBR) project was a national-scale applied research initiative developed between 2021 and 2022 through a partnership among the Ministry of Tourism, the Ministry of Agrarian Development and Family Agriculture, and the Fluminense Federal University (UFF). Its central objective was to broaden and diversify Brazil’s tourism offerings by integrating products and services from family farming into structured tourism routes. The initiative aimed to stimulate income generation in rural areas—particularly in the post-pandemic recovery period—while promoting cultural heritage and environmental sustainability.

The project supported rural entrepreneurs involved in farming, agro-industry, livestock, extractivism, and tourism. In its first edition, it focused on four productive chains—cheese, wine, beer, and Amazonian fruits—benefiting around 150 families and leading to the development of more than 70 tourism experiences. In the second edition, eight regional routes across the country were selected for technical support, including business planning, product positioning, and destination development (Marques et al., 2023). The research team combined academic methods with participatory approaches, generating data that informed both scientific publications and technical materials, made available in open-access formats^[2].

This project exemplifies the kind of applied research I advocate: grounded in public policy, built through collaboration, and oriented toward long-term, shared value. It demonstrates how scientific knowledge can inform concrete action, while being shaped by the specificities of territory, culture, and practice.

3.3 Original Brazil Experiences (EBO)

The Original Brazil Experiences (Experiências do Brasil Original) project, conducted in 2023–2024, was a public policy initiative coordinated by the Ministries of Tourism, Indigenous Peoples, and Racial Equality. It focused on Indigenous and Quilombola communities located in the Amazon and Cerrado biomes, adopting a Participatory Action Research (PAR) approach to co-create tourism experiences aligned with each community’s identity and aspirations. All stages of participatory planning were implemented—from diagnosis to product design, qualification, promotion, and replication strategies.

I worked directly with the Borari people of Alter do Chão, in the heart of the Amazon, where mass tourism often obscures Indigenous identity. Our goal was to support the creation of experiences that honor Borari culture, promote environmental responsibility, and address social and gender issues. This process challenged us to rethink fixed ideas about indigeneity, to recognize the presence of identity even where it is not always visible, and to understand cultural expression as plural and evolving. The project also demonstrated the power of co-creation and hospitality as central values in tourism with traditional peoples.

As with other projects, the initiative required the integration of diverse knowledge areas—economics, management, marketing, and mixed methods research. It also demanded the ability to manage teams and processes across institutional and cultural boundaries, while remaining flexible and respectful of local contexts. The outcomes included a series of community-led tourism products, videos, technical manuals, methodological reports, and open-access materials^[3]. More than deliverables, these were the result of mutual learning, shared authorship, and a commitment to building knowledge that circulates, transforms, and endures.

3.    Lessons learned: Meaning, Bias and Change

Beyond the technical and logistical demands of applied research, the projects described here left enduring personal and collective lessons—about what tourism can do, how knowledge is perceived, and how we, as researchers, interact with the world.

Transform through tourism (of course).

We often forget that tourism is not just an economic activity—it is also a major form of personal transformation. When tourism experiences are thoughtfully designed, not just to entertain or to repeat clichés, but to provoke reflection, they can touch hearts and minds. The interplay between hedonic and eudaimonic elements—pleasure and purpose—can lead to personal growth and the emergence of new perspectives (Mayer et al., 2019). In times of crisis and polarization, this is more necessary than ever. If tourism development is driven only by short-term goals like jobs and income, mass tourism will continue to dominate. It is easier, faster, and harder to disrupt. Deeper motivations—cultural pride, identity, environmental protection—must guide our work if we want tourism to serve transformation.

Empower… but how?

The concept of empowerment, while well-intentioned, carries the risk of paternalism. Who decides what it means to empower someone? In projects conducted in the Amazon, I was constantly reminded of my limitations. I am not from there. I am nothing in the forest. Real power was already present—in the Borari people’s hospitality, in their spiritual life, in their commitment to the Tapajós River. Our role was not to “give” power, but to create space for it to manifest and be recognized. That requires humility, relational ethics, and a posture of learning. Sometimes, facilitation is more important than intervention.

Judgment and decision-making: overcoming our biases.

Applied research forces us to confront our own mental shortcuts. It challenges the researcher’s privileged position of “knower” and requires us to question automatic responses, rooted assumptions, and cognitive comfort zones. One of the most pervasive biases we face is confirmation bias—our tendency to seek and prioritize information that reinforces our existing beliefs. This bias is everywhere: in social media algorithms, in scientific circles, in policy decisions. It shapes how we frame questions and interpret answers (Pinker, 2021).

If the pandemic taught us anything, it is that judgment is not neutral. Discussions about life and death, health and science, were quickly overtaken by political agendas, magical thinking, and misinformation. Fear, social context, and ideological frames influenced public opinion and scientific interpretation alike. As researchers, we must remain vigilant. Scientific reasoning is not immune to bias—but it gives us tools to mitigate it. Applying those tools in community settings means being transparent about our uncertainties, engaging in genuine dialogue, and continuously checking the assumptions that guide our practice.

4.    Principles and Tensions:  Research with Societal Relevance

Building on the lessons shared in the previous section—about transformation, judgment, and ethical engagement—I now turn to the structural aspects of this research approach. Applied research is not a linear process. It requires navigating uncertainty, aligning expectations, and negotiating meanings in dynamic and often unpredictable contexts. From my experience, this kind of research is most effective when it is flexible in design but grounded in core principles: scientific rigor, ethical commitment, and social relevance. These principles have guided my work in diverse territories and partnerships, where adaptation is as crucial as planning, and listening is as powerful as knowing.

Applied research aims to generate public knowledge—open, reusable, and methodologically robust. It involves co-creation with communities, governments, and institutions, and produces outcomes that circulate in multiple formats: scientific publications, technical manuals, educational resources, and policy briefs. Knowledge translation is not a secondary task, but a fundamental component of the process. It requires adapting complex concepts without diluting them, broadening access without abandoning depth.

This view aligns with Gibbons et al.’s (1994) notion of Mode 2 knowledge production—contextual, problem-oriented, transdisciplinary—and with Harding’s (1991) call for strong objectivity, which values the inclusion of diverse epistemic voices. Far from being a simplification of science, applied research expands its reach and accountability.

Yet the path is not without risks and tensions. Projects like these are time- and energy-intensive, requiring interdisciplinary coordination, relational work, and often unrecognized labor. When misaligned with institutional structures, researchers may face high levels of stress or struggle to demonstrate scientific value within conventional metrics. Moreover, when applied research is too closely tied to state or market agendas, it may become instrumentalized—reduced to service delivery and detached from critical engagement.

In parallel, communities may face research fatigue, especially when projects fail to deliver concrete benefits or return results in accessible ways. In Brazil, for instance, there is a long history of foreign researchers conducting studies in Indigenous, rural, and urban communities—often without reciprocity. When research leaves no local trace—no shared authorship, no open materials, no dialogue—it reinforces extractivist patterns and deepens epistemic asymmetries.

There is also the persistent challenge of epistemic legitimacy. In many academic contexts, particularly in the Global South, applied and community-engaged research tends to be undervalued. While it is true that highly localized and practical studies can have limited reach or relevance when not grounded in robust theories and methods, this does not justify the widespread skepticism that surrounds socially embedded research. Even when grounded in rigorous methodology and legitimate epistemological traditions, socially embedded research often faces significant barriers to recognition. Publishing in high-impact journals can be particularly difficult, as editorial standards tend to prioritize certain paradigms, geographies, and styles of inquiry—limiting the visibility of work rooted in local contexts or alternative frameworks.

5.    Toward a framework of impactful and collaborative research

The experiences presented in this chapter point toward a model of applied tourism research that is at once methodologically rigorous, socially responsive, and ethically grounded. This is not a fixed blueprint, but a set of guiding principles that support relevance and academic quality across diverse contexts. It stems from real-world engagement, critical reflexivity, and a commitment to building knowledge that serves society.

As illustrated in Figure 1, applied research bridges two central domains: scientific knowledge, rooted in theory and methodology, and societal demands, anchored in values and lived realities. Projects typically begin with concrete territorial needs, not with abstract gaps in the literature. From this starting point, research questions, methodological strategies, partnerships, and dissemination plans are collaboratively shaped. Early steps include diagnosing the nature of the problem, identifying expected outcomes, defining team roles, and cultivating trust through respectful and sustained interaction.

Building ethically grounded, institutionally supported applied research requires critical reflexivity at every stage—from project design to dissemination, from partnerships to publication. It is this reflective and dialogical process that allows tourism research to serve society—not by simplifying science, but by enabling it to move, circulate, and transform.

This framework also calls for the diversification of academic outputs, recognizing that manuals, open-access reports, policy briefs, and public engagement materials—alongside peer-reviewed articles—are legitimate and necessary contributions to knowledge circulation. It requires sustained institutional investment in interdisciplinary labs, student engagement, and long-term partnerships with public institutions and communities. Ethical reflexivity must be nurtured throughout, enabling researchers to address power asymmetries, epistemic differences, and the emotional demands of continuous engagement.

Another essential but often underestimated element is data protection. Applied research projects that engage communities and institutions must ensure not only the ethical collection of data, but also its secure storage and long-term accessibility. Protecting data is key to safeguarding the knowledge generated, maintaining institutional memory, and enabling future use—especially in political and administrative contexts marked by discontinuity. When properly organized and preserved, this data supports the creation of diverse outputs: scientific articles, technical manuals, case studies, educational materials, and policy tools. Without such care, valuable insights—along with the methods that proved effective or challenging—can be lost, undermining the sustainability and impact of the research. In this sense, data protection is not just a technical concern, but a commitment to legacy, transparency, and collaborative continuity.

Finally, collaboration with governments and funders should be welcomed—but without compromising academic autonomy. Policy alignment must not lead to capture, but to critical and constructive engagement. When rooted in these principles, applied tourism research becomes more than a methodological choice—it becomes a political and epistemological stance. It enables the university to act not only as a center of knowledge production, but also as a space of listening, co-creation, and shared responsibility. In times of uncertainty, complexity, and urgent transitions, this model offers a path forward for research that matters.

Written by Verônica Feder Mayer, Fluminense Federal University, Brazil

Read Verônica’s letter to future generations of tourism researchers

References

Benjamin, S., Lee, K.-S., & Boluk, K. (2025). Shit Has to Change, Right? A Call for “Good Trouble” in Tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 64(4), 1016–1024. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472875241276542

Cavalheiro, M. B., Mayer, V. F., & Luz, A. B. T. (2022). Turismo náutico em Niterói: Plano estratégico com recomendações de ações (p. 35). Universidade Federal Fluminense. https://turismonautico.uff.br/2022/12/10/http-turismonautico-uff-br-wp-content-uploads-sites-380-2022-12-pdpa4455_relatorio-do-nichos-prioritarios_pdpa-4455_entrega-neltur-valido-1-pdf/

Dwivedi, Y. K., Jeyaraj, A., Hughes, L., Davies, G. H., Ahuja, M., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Al-Sharhan, S., Al-Sulaiti, K. I., Altinay, L., Amalaya, S., Archak, S., Ballestar, M. T., Bhagwat, S. A., Bharadwaj, A., Bhushan, A., Bose, I., Budhwar, P., Bunker, D., … Walton, P. (2024). “Real impact”: Challenges and opportunities in bridging the gap between research and practice – Making a difference in industry, policy, and society. International Journal of Information Management, 102750. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJINFOMGT.2023.102750

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies (p. ix, 179). Sage Publications, Inc.

Harding, S. (1991). Whose Science? Whose Knowledge?: Thinking from Women’s Lives. Cornell University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt1hhfnmg

Marques, O., Edra, F. P. M., & Silva, M. S. da. (2023). Turismo rural no Brasil e experiências turísticas memoráveis | Paco Editorial.

Mayer, V. F., Machado, J. dos S., Marques, O., & Nunes, J. M. G. (2019). Mixed feelings?: Fluctuations in well-being during tourist travels. Service Industries Journal, 0(0), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2019.1600671

Nowotny, H., Scott, P. B., & Gibbons, M. T. (2001). Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty | Wiley. Wiley.

Pinker, S. (2021). Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It Matters (Large type / Large print edition). Random House Large Print.