Following my initial exploration of the neurodiversity paradigm, I wanted to begin researching how autism intersects with international travel. My aim was not to begin thinking about design solutions, but to understand what academic research already existed within this area and identify where the current gaps in knowledge might be.

This paper became a significant turning point in my research. Rather than simply discussing the barriers experienced by autistic travellers, the authors argue that tourism as a discipline has largely overlooked neurodiversity altogether. They question whether tourism research has kept pace with modern understandings of neurodiversity and propose an entirely new research agenda for the field. This immediately stood out to me because it shifted my focus away from individual travel experiences and towards the wider systems, theories, and responsibilities that shape them.

Initial Reflections

One of the most interesting aspects of this paper was its comparison between the Medical Model and the Social Model of disability. Previous research had already introduced me to these concepts, but this was the first time I had seen them applied directly to tourism.

The paper argues that tourism has traditionally focused on physical accessibility and has often viewed neurodivergence through a medical lens, concentrating on diagnosis, impairment and individual support. In contrast, the Social Model suggests that many barriers are created by environments, systems and attitudes rather than by neurodivergence itself.

This immediately made me question how the tourism industry currently understands autism. Are autistic travellers experiencing difficulties because of autism itself, or because tourism systems have been designed around neurotypical expectations? I found myself becoming much more interested in these wider theoretical debates than simply identifying practical barriers.

Emerging Themes

Throughout the paper, several key themes repeatedly emerged.

The first was the relationship between the Neurodiversity Paradigm and tourism. The authors argue that tourism research has yet to fully embrace contemporary understandings of neurodiversity, despite these ideas becoming increasingly influential across education, employment and healthcare.

Another recurring theme was the distinction between accessibility and inclusion. The paper suggests that providing accessible facilities alone is not enough. Instead, tourism should move towards creating genuinely neuro-inclusive environments that promote equality, participation and belonging.

I was also particularly interested in the discussion surrounding responsibility. Rather than placing responsibility solely on neurodivergent individuals or families, the authors argue that governments, tourism organisations, researchers and policymakers all have a role to play in creating more equitable travel experiences. This was one of the strongest arguments within the paper and something I would like to explore further.

Perhaps the most valuable section of the paper was the proposed agenda for future research. Rather than presenting definitive answers, the authors identify numerous unanswered questions and encourage researchers to explore neurodiversity within tourism from new theoretical perspectives. Reading these recommendations made me realise that this is still a relatively underdeveloped field with significant opportunities for further research.

Key Ideas Taken from the Paper

• Tourism has been slow to engage with neurodiversity – Despite growing recognition across other disciplines, neurodiversity remains significantly underrepresented within tourism research.
• Medical Model vs Social Model – Tourism research can be positioned along a continuum between deficit-based thinking and socially constructed understandings of disability.
• Accessibility versus Inclusion – Accessible tourism is not necessarily inclusive tourism; inclusion requires participation, belonging and equality.
• Shared responsibility – Governments, tourism organisations, researchers and policymakers all share responsibility for creating more equitable travel experiences.

Emerging Questions

• How can the Neurodiversity Paradigm be applied to tourism research?
• Is the tourism industry still operating primarily within the Medical Model of disability?
• What is the difference between accessible tourism and genuinely neuro-inclusive tourism?
• Who should be responsible for creating inclusive travel experiences?