ABSTRACT
The destinations that backpackers choose to visit and their typical routes of travel are considered, among other things, as seminal characteristics that distinguish them from mass tourists (Cohen, 1972; Elsrud, 2001; Maoz, 2005; Noy, 2004; Uriely, Yonay & Simchai, 2002). However, the literature lacks a systematic comparison of backpackers who travel to different destinations. Such an inquiry appears to be useful, for example, in light of the tourist destination’s conventional development process, in which a destination that was initially associated with backpacking might be transformed over time into a commercialized location associated with mass tourism (Butler, 1980; Smith, 1978; Westerhausen, 2002). In this regard, one might assume that the segment of backpackers who travel to less developed destinations that are exclusively associated with backpacking would differ in terms of attitudes and activities from backpackers who travel to destinations that they perceive as more developed or commercialized. Note that this assumption receives support in the segmentation of backpackers’ within Australia (Loker-Murphy, 1996). In an attempt to advance this line of inquiry further, the current study examines differences between Israelis who went backpacking in South and Central America and their counterparts in Southeast Asia in terms of destination risk perceptions and risk reduction strategies. Previous research suggests that the imagery of the “Far East” (Southeast Asia) among Israeli backpackers has been that of spirituality, involving the activities of periods of sojourn in ashrams, passive relaxation on tropical beaches and the use of drugs (Mevorach, 1997; Maoz, 2006, 2007; Noy & Cohen, 2005). In contrast, South and Central American destinations share an image of adventure-related sites that involve risky activities and extreme sports in natural settings, such as jungle trekking and mountain climbing (Noy & Cohen, 2005). In congruence with the prevailing orientation of most backpacking research to rely mainly on qualitative methods, these observations rely predominantly on the researchers’ impressionistic interpretations derived from interviews and ethnographic data. Thus, a
systematic quantitative comparison between Israeli backpackers who traveled to Southeast Asia vs. those who traveled to South and Central America appears to be useful in an attempt to validate these observations. Furthermore, such a comparison would shed light on the role of destination choice as a discerning factor and segmentation basis within the backpacking population.
