Travellers’ meaning-making of the Sichuan-Tibet highway: from space of flows to place

Abstract

The relationship between mobility and place-making in the context of tourism based on the new mobilities paradigm has been explored. Taking road travel on the Sichuan-Tibet Highway in southwestern China as a case, auto-ethnography and mobile ethnography are employed as the primary research methods, along with in-depth interviews, observations, personal travel log writings, and second-hand data collection. The question that how the space of road becomes a meaningful place through the mobility of road travellers thus has been answered. The mobility pattern of travellers is found to be stable in the time dimension and there are periodic repetitions in the spatial dimension, making ‘place-ballet’ on the highway. Accordingly, the road changes from space of flows into a place that is richly endowed with meaning. The travellers’ imagination of the road plays an important role in their interactions with the road, helping them making the meaning of the road. Multiple mobility practices shape the traveller’s ‘sense of the road’. In particular, the road is not a homogenous space in motion, but a ‘wrinkled’ one with numerous anchoring points. These moorings such as restaurants, hostels and landmarks shape travellers’ emotional connection with the road. Proactive or forced stillness not only affect the pace of the traveller’s mobility, but also broadens their understanding of the road and road travel. Therefore, the meaning attributed to the road is constructed by the mobility and the moorings. Accordingly, a comprehensive understanding of road travel, which is a distinct form of mobility practice, is generated. Moreover, the understanding of roads as a space of flows has been deepened and the significance of travel channels within mobility studies is highlighted. Finally, roads are regarded as a meaning place, which contributes to forming a ‘mobile concept’ of the place.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.