Paper short abstract:

There have been recent claims that a ‘new mobilities paradigm’ is especially appropriate to tourism studies. However, applying Kuhn’s to social science generally is problematic and, though useful, 'the new mobilities paradigm' is neither a paradigm nor necessary in tourism studies.

Paper long abstract:

Kuhn’s perception of paradigms changed over time, and eventually he considered the exemplar to be the defining feature of specialised scientific communities, the sole arbiters of scientific progress, who possess a shared lexicon, more or less incommensurable to non-members. The ensuing debate as to whether or not paradigms, including the new mobilities paradigm (NMP), are found in the social science is summarised, and claims it is of special relevance to tourism studies are examined. Authenticity has indeed been a key concept, but ‘the discourse of authenticity’ has not dominated tourism studies, and Western and Asian scholars, despite a slow start, are now increasingly and successfully applying Western social science concepts to Asian (especially Chinese) tourism without recourse to a ‘non-Western’ or ‘Asian’ paradigm. However, while ‘mobilities’ is not a paradigm, the NMP is a useful perspective that is commensurable with different theoretical approaches to tourism and other forms of travel.