Souvenirs: A Systematic Literature Review (1981–2020) and Research Agenda

Period 1 (1981–2000)

Early research mainly explained the evolution of souvenirs, described the development of regional souvenir business, and analyzed the interaction between the souvenir business and society, economy, and culture. In this period, initial research emerged which explored the typology of souvenirs; the function, meanings, and values of souvenirs. This period was dominated by case study research in which the discipline of anthropology was most used. The research area was mostly concentrated in North America and the Asia Pacific.

Period 2 (2001–2010)

During this period, the research object expanded from the souvenir to other parts of the tourism system related to souvenirs. The important feature of this stage is that the buyers-tourists who are the core elements of the tourism system receive attention. Scholars revealed shopping behavior and discussed souvenir business strategies. Cultural sustainability and ecological issues related to certain types of souvenirs began to receive attention. More disciplines helped develop knowledge and theories in this field, which came from marketing, psychology, geography, art, and law. The research region was expanded to Europe.

Period 3 (2011–2020)

In the expansion period, the volume of papers dedicated to the study of souvenirs is increasing rapidly. Significant progress was the depth and breadth of souvenir research. Swanson and Timothy’s (2012) review provided a good guide for further studies. A notable feature of this research phase is that some researchers from the lens of souvenirs to study other important tourism issues, such as tourist revisit intention and place attachment; destination image; rural tourism; the impact of tourism retailers on cultural tourism experience; the sustainability of destination economy, culture, and ecology. The research methodologies were more diversified to experimental research, visual research, content analysis, and grounded theory.

Object

In Figure 5, the node of “object” is linked with terms of meaning, time, and space, which reveals a complex message attached to souvenirs. Researchers analyzed which objects are included in tourist souvenirs. Therefore, the typology of souvenirs helps researchers into thoughts. Gordon (1986) made classification by souvenirs’ descriptive characteristics. This typology has been employed in many empirical studies. Subsequently, some researchers developed typologies based on functional and symbolic dimensions (Decrop & Masset, 2014; Swanson & Timothy, 2012), and others segment souvenirs by the degree of consumption experience (Anastasiadou & Vettese, 2019). The recent typology of souvenirs highlights the diversity of tourist demands in consumption, which infers that the souvenir evolution is continuing based on consumption trends. Understanding the souvenir consumption trends is necessary because it would affect the souvenir design for which should consider cultural connotations as well as to meet present tourism market needs.

Meaning

Identifying the meanings of souvenirs provide a way to understand why souvenirs have a magical attraction. The terms that often appear at the same time as “meaning” indicates that souvenirs have symbolic meaning because they serve as a medium that connects time and space (Morgan & Pritchard, 2005), place and person (Swanson & Timothy, 2012), travel memory, and daily life (Haldrup, 2017). They represent the self-identity of tourists that used to describe themselves in some aspects, such as a desire for an imaginary ideal lifestyle, a narrative of a tourist’s interaction with a place, life, time, persons, and other cultures (Love & Kohn, 2001; Morgan & Pritchard, 2005). Additionally, souvenirs as gifts express the practice of maintaining good social relations with others. It can be seen that the multiple and dynamic meanings of the souvenir go beyond the object itself, revealing that tourists get a unique psychological experience from the souvenir. Souvenirs are also meaningful to artisans (Schilar & Keskitalo, 2018). Therefore, in order to extend our knowledge of the meaning of souvenirs, it is necessary to understand which metaphors the souvenirs designed by crafters reflect and how to present these metaphors.

Image

Another subtheme is the image reflected by souvenirs. Souvenirs convey parts of the projected destination image that are expected by tourists (Mariné-Roig, 2011). Postcards were often used to assess their role in representing a destination image (Markwick, 2001a; Milman, 2012), and were found to evoke tourists’ emotions and indirectly affect a travel desire (Yüksel & Akgül, 2007). Mariné-Roig (2011) observed souvenirs displayed in shops and identified different coexisting and conflicting cultural tourist images in Barcelona. Lund et al. (2018) discussed the role of souvenirs of Atlantic Puffin in shaping the Arctic landscapes of Reykjavík. These findings imply that the image of souvenirs could be used to investigate the destination representations in the eyes of tourists. Besides, it may be efficient for destination image rebuilding to design and promote souvenirs with elements consistent with destination identity. Such research is important because it can help destination marketing organizations to identify whether souvenirs are effective place promotion tools.

Economic development

This subtheme includes economic significance, challenges, and management strategies.

Researchers are concerned about the economic significance of souvenir business for peripheral areas. The development of souvenir business changes the local economic structure in which handicraft trade is no longer a part of the local traditional agricultural economy but a critical export trade and a part of the global economy (Chifos, 2006). It adjusts economic relationships as the change of target consumers from locals to outsiders (Schiller, 2008). The souvenir business alters the participation of grassroots level citizens in the tourism industry and improves their economic empowerment (Chifos, 2006; Nason, 1984). Thus, the souvenir business plays a significant role in poverty alleviation. Prince (2017) reported that craft artists innovate and restructure rural spaces to participate in tourism. On the contrary, the research of the economic impact of souvenir business on developed places is limited.

When emphasizing the economic significance, the central principle is managing the business to seize opportunities and overcome challenges. Schiller (2008) revealed that tourism added a functional conflict between heritage preservation and economic competition to a souvenir marketplace in Florence. Trupp (2015) raised an issue about the sustainability of immigrant souvenir vendors’ embeddedness in the urban economy structure in Thailand. Similarly, Lasso and Dahles’ (2018) findings challenged the view that tourism livelihoods are sustainable. In fact, under the COVID-19 pandemic situation, the global tourism economy and the local souvenir economy are in decline (Sigala, 2020). In addition to COVID-19, it is important for researchers to consider the research in what challenges should be paid attention to and how to deal with them because such research will contribute to the sustainability of the souvenir business.

Product evolution

This subtheme includes products evolution, craft artists’ practices, and crafters’ efforts. Content analysis in this area indicates that many souvenirs are commercialized from regional ethnic arts, tools, and handicrafts.

In the evolution course, their shapes, function, meanings, and symbolism are developed (Torabian & Arai, 2016). Articles associated with this topic also consider how the process takes place. It happens under the complex interaction of political, economic, and social, and cultural factors (E. Cohen, 1989; Horner, 1993; Nason, 1984). Craftsmen, intermediaries, outside enterprises, retailers, tourists, governments, and Non-Governmental Organizations interact in the product development (e.g., Nason, 1984; Trinh et al., 2014). Husa (2020) reported that guests and hosts mutually negotiated which kind of items should be considered “typically Thai” for production. Thus, souvenirs can be regarded as products of economic, social, and cultural exchange between destinations and the outside world.

Another topic focuses on craft-artists’ practice in rural tourism (Prince, 2017) through souvenir business and woodcrafter’s efforts for their work accepted as fine art (Chibnik, 2006). These studies discussed the roles of artists and crafters as well as the roles of arts and souvenirs. Their roles are not opposite, so it is essential to explore how arts and souvenirs could be integrated into a specific tourism context.

Production

Several articles related to “production” consider how to produce good souvenirs. Hitchcock and Teague (2000) pointed out that good souvenirs are made by skilled crafters who have revived traditional objects to suit the new market. Research findings enlighten practitioners in five ways to produce a good souvenir: ensuring the cultural authenticity being maintained and vouched for on labels (Asplet & Cooper, 2000); valuing the effect of culture in the sustainable development of souvenirs (Chifos, 2006); breaking the opposition relationship between art and souvenirs and enhancing the artistic quality (Thompson et al., 2012); incorporating the co-creation of tourists in production (Anastasiadou & Vettese, 2019); and increasing level of innovation (Naidu et al., 2014). About innovation, digital technology, augmented reality, and 3D printing technologies are applied. These products are demonstrated their capability to enhance personality and interactive experience and the possibility to influence revisit desire (e.g., Anastasiadou & Vettese, 2019; Petrelli et al., 2017). Indeed, new technology helps tourists to find diverse approaches to record and share travel experiences and keep in touch with destinations, residents, and objects. Thus, whether the importance of souvenirs with traditional forms for tourists would decline need further concern.

Community

As can be seen in Figure 5, “community” is located at the center of Cluster 2. It indicates local communities are very active in the souvenir business, which attracts much academic attention. Content analysis reveals that the souvenir business may provide retailers’ cash with low production costs, freedom to participate in other socioeconomic activities (Conndy-Kirch, 1982), and help ethnic suppliers construct self-image and equal relationships with outsiders (e.g., Cone, 1995). In contrast, it may exacerbate socioeconomic inequality (J. H. Cohen, 2001), or resulting in traditional livelihood loss (Lasso & Dahles, 2018). Therefore, accessing to what degree the impact of tourism and how tourism development should be on poverty alleviation and residents’ well-being from the perspective of the souvenir business will have implications for sustainable tourism.

In addition to the discussion on the social impact of the souvenir business, researchers paid attention to the cultural impact of the souvenir business on communities. Producing, displaying, and selling authentic souvenirs is accompanied by the cultural exchange between residents and external audiences. As a positive impact, from the community side, cultural identity, national identity, culture preservation, cultural change and innovation, social value change, and self-identity of residents, especially women, have been identified (E. Cohen, 1989; Markwick, 2001b; Nason, 1984). However, despite many related papers discussing the positive impact of souvenir business on culture, some studies concerned cultural exchange ownership and cultural loss issues. Blundell (1993) and Simons (2000) pointed out that cultural autonomy is related to the sustainable development of indigenous tourism and indigenous communities. Two case studies proved that over-tourism could easily cause culture loss (Lasso & Dahles, 2018; Milman, 2015). Therefore, keeping a balance of dynamic cultural exchange between souvenir supply-side and demand-side is an issue.

Motivation

Some papers analyzed souvenir shopping motivation. It has been found that twofold motivations, travel motives (e.g., F. Li & Ryan, 2018; Swanson & Horridge, 2006), and purchase motives (e.g., F. Li & Ryan, 2018; Wilkins, 2011) that affect shopping behavior. In addition, food souvenirs are the most concerned research object, and most of the relevant research was conducted on Asian tourists. Researchers found that food souvenirs consist of sensory, utility, and symbolic dimensions (Lin & Mao, 2015) that influence tourists’ purchase motivation (Lin, 2017).

Factor

Looking at the node of “factor” and its’ co-occurring terms, it was identified topics associated with it mainly includes factors influencing shopping motivation (e.g., Ansari et al., 2019; Huang et al., 2020); key factors in shopping decisions; and price, culture, authenticity, shopping attitude that influencing the key elements of decision-making (e.g., Asadi et al., 2014; M. Li & Cai, 2008; Park, 2000; Revilla & Dodd, 2003); and factors influencing shopping satisfaction (e.g., Altintzoglou et al., 2016; Oviedo-García et al., 2016).

Difference

Content analysis reveals that for the market segmentation, several articles explored the souvenir purchasing behavior of different groups. Some articles profiled tourist behavior by consumer segmentation used variables related to travel behavior, like tourism styles (e.g., Littrell et al., 1994; Oh et al., 2004), and travel motivation (Kong & Chang, 2012). The other category explored the purchase behavior of specific groups, like craft selection criteria and shopping involvement (Hu & Yu, 2007). The first category neglected the depth of the souvenir shopping experience, while the second category did not thoroughly combine shopping experience with tourism styles. Therefore, it is necessary for researchers to link tourists’ characteristics with their shopping experiences in segmenting and profiling tourist behavior, to predict their purchase behavior. As for studies on shopping characteristics of specific groups, women, Chinese tourists, pilgrims, and honeymoon tourists, souvenir gift buyers were focused on (e.g., Anderson & Littrell, 1995; Gao et al., 2017; Shtudiner et al., 2019; Ünal et al., 2017).

Retailer

The term “retailer” in this theme emphasizes the important role of retailers in tourists’ souvenir shopping behavior, and also reveals that understanding tourists’ purchasing behavior can help retailers carry out effective marketing. Several studies examined effective marketing strategies for souvenir retailers. For instance, limiting purchasing opportunities to in-store only could increase purchase likelihood (Abendroth, 2011); the brand effect could promote souvenir sales (Liao et al., 2014); for authenticate souvenirs, storytelling is a common retailer’ strategy (Schilar & Keskitalo, 2018; Soukhathammavong & Park, 2019).

Antecedents of souvenir shopping satisfaction

The main feature of related articles in this cluster is that they are often analyzed by establishing structural models to test the factors influencing souvenir shopping satisfaction. For example, Oviedo-García et al. (2016) identified factors that consist of shopping satisfaction. Later on, Vega-Vázquez et al. (2017) studied the effect of shopping value on tourist shopping satisfaction, overall tourist satisfaction, and positive word-of-mouth. Similarly, Suhartanto (2018) examined the effect of satisfaction with shopping attributes on overall shopping satisfaction and found the relationship between overall shopping satisfaction, tourist satisfaction, destination image, and destination loyalty. Improving shopping satisfaction is an integral part of a retailer’s business strategy. Knowing the antecedents of souvenir shopping satisfaction helps practitioners to offer a better shopping environment to have the best practical performance.

Consequences of souvenir shopping satisfaction

Articles in this Cluster explored how far-reaching impact does souvenir shopping satisfaction has on tourists’ travel behavior. It has been identified that shopping satisfaction positively affects customer loyalty (Gallarza et al., 2017), and destination loyalty (Suhartanto, 2018). A satisfying and co-creative shopping experience contributes to long-lasting memories, and through the effect of memories, tourists’ attachment to the destination is enhanced (Sthapit et al., 2018). This type of emerging research explored the role of shopping satisfaction experience in predicting travel behavior providing in-depth explanations of the role of souvenirs in destination marketing.

Souvenir authenticity

It can be seen from Figure 5 that compared with the positions of other nodes in Cluster 5, the nodes of souvenir authenticity are located at the edge of this theme. Its location is just at the center of the division between the tourist side (Cluster 4 and Cluster 5) and the supply side (Cluster 1, Cluster 2, and Cluster 3). This suggests that by means of souvenir authenticity, both sides can communicate well. For tourists, shopping for souvenirs often reflects a desire of tourists to seek authentic experiences (Xie et al., 2012). Authenticity is a key factor considered when looking for souvenirs (Lee et al., 2009). Good souvenirs are perceived as authentic reminders of a tourist destination and express a personal relationship (Horner, 1993). Researchers summarized criteria used to perceive authenticity in crafts (e.g., Elomba & Yun, 2017; Revilla & Dodd, 2003) and to define authentic quality in food souvenirs (Ho et al., 2021). Researchers also identified that the more familiarity with the local culture, the stricter the authenticity that tourists hold (Revilla & Dodd, 2003). From the supplier perspective, place and culture reflection, use of natural materials, traditional equipment, and handmade processing are generally accepted determinants of authenticity (Soukhathammavong & Park, 2019; Trinh et al., 2014). Suppliers generally hold the view of dynamic authenticity and believe souvenir design should be developed based on tourist expectations. They apply strategies to authenticate souvenirs (e.g., Asplet & Cooper, 2000; Schilar & Keskitalo, 2018). Researchers have indicated how tourists and suppliers perceive the authentic quality of souvenirs. This type of research is essential because it highlights the process and content of the authenticity negotiation that is beneficial to provide a valuable reference for how to promote the healthy operation of the tourism system on the premise for stakeholders to achieve common goals.

Time-pressure shopping setting influencing souvenir sales

Researchers can test different time-pressure related shopping settings for selling souvenirs. In many souvenir stores, it is common to observe that tourists do not purchase any item after browsing through products. There is a theory called “limited edition effect.” The limited edition effect shows that products become more attractive if they have a “limited edition” label on them (Nunoi et al., 2013). Therefore, examining the effects of different time-pressure shopping settings such as limited edition on tourist souvenir purchase intention will benefit souvenir marketing. Researchers can conduct experimental research on this topic.

Profiles of the behavior related to souvenirs of specifical types of tourists

Tourism style impacts souvenir purchase behavior (Littrell et al., 1994; Oh et al., 2004). Buying souvenirs is the main travel activity for specific types of tourists such as cultural tourists and cruise visitors (Cave et al., 2012; Chen & Huang, 2018). Souvenirs are cultural products. Researchers can explore whether cultural tourists hold different consumption behavior from other types of tourists. Besides, the travel activities of cruise visitors on the destinations may be under time pressure. A comparative study on the souvenir purchase behavior of cruise visitors and stayover tourists is helpful to provide a valuable reference for the design of cruise ship tourism products.

Multi-faceted shopping experience of creative tourists

The tourist experience is regarded as a key element of value creation within the tourism industry (Prebensen & Foss, 2011). A satisfactory and co-creative souvenir shopping experience contributed to long-lasting memories. According to Packer and Ballantyne’s (2016) model of visitor experience, a positive or pleasant experience contains multi-facets. While in the context of souvenir consumption, further research needs to understand the detailed facets of tourist experience related to souvenirs. Creative tourism brings new opportunities for the souvenir business. It can combine selling creative experience, which is engaged in handicraft co-creation and in-depth social interactions. Packer and Ballantyne’s (2016) model of visitor experience can be used to examine the multi-faceted shopping experience of creative tourists because of this model’s strength in characterizing the content and intensity of visitor experience for different groups.

Sense of well-being possibly enhanced by souvenirs

Although souvenirs are mainly consumed in the post-trip period, limited research in this area has been found. Souvenirs play an important role in linking the relationship between tourism and everyday life (Morgan & Pritchard, 2005); the passage of time and gaining tourist experience affect the meanings of souvenirs (Collins-Kreiner & Zins, 2011). It infers that souvenirs possibly enhance tourists’ sense of well-being in a short or long time (Sthapit et al., 2018). Therefore, whether and how a sense of well-being can be enhanced by souvenirs need empirical research.

Feasibility of the transformation from onsite to online business triggered by COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic may bring long-term, transformative changes to the tourism industry (Sigala, 2020). Global tourism has been suffering an unprecedented crisis (Sigala, 2020), which forces the souvenir business to struggle to deal with the challenge. During COVID-19, consumers’ online shopping and virtual tourism experience are increasingly growing in many countries (Donthu & Gustafsson, 2020; Sigala, 2020). The online consumption trends may provide opportunities for souvenir retailing (Lu et al., 2021). Researchers can develop research models that combine the knowledge of souvenir shopping and virtual tourism. An experimental approach is recommended.

The results of cultural exchange through souvenirs from tourist perspectives

In Figure 5, the term “souvenir authenticity” is just in the middle of the tourist side and the community side. This evidence to some degree supports that souvenir objects is a cultural exchange result. Cultural exchange is a two-way process. While previous studies have explored the results of the cultural exchange for destination communities, there is limited understanding of what changes have been made to external audiences-tourists. The communication with producers and sellers, the participation in products co-creation, and the consumption and appreciation of souvenirs may have some degree of impacts on tourists’ beliefs, social value, esthetics, and attitude. Researchers can make exploration.

Destination promotion through the medium of souvenirs

One of the primary tasks of local governments is destination promotion. As reported, certain souvenirs have been used as a tool for destination image reconstruction (China National Radio, 2019; Wang, 2019). However, its mechanism and effect are unknown. Researchers can explore the path that souvenirs influencing destination image. Researchers can also analyze what strategies the government can provide for souvenir suppliers to collaboratively build destination brands.

Destination image and travel intention triggered by souvenirs

In Figure 5, the node of the term “friend” apparently appears on the edge of the cluster-tourist shopping behavior. This phenomenon enlightens further thinking since friends are the main recipients of souvenir gifts. One motive to buy souvenirs is maintaining a social relationship through gift-giving. Tourists’ gift giving behavior acts on gift recipients. However, the limited literature only focuses on tourists’ shopping behavior motivated by gift-giving; knowledge about recipients is overlooked. Although souvenirs contain rich information about a destination, there is a lack of research on whether a good gift will generate a positive destination image and whether such objects will arouse a visit interest. Researchers are recommended to explore whether a gift will trigger a recipient’s destination image and travel intention. Such research is essential because, through the effect of these tangible items, it may be possible to enhance the destination promotion effect in the context of travel restrictions on the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, researchers can study the effect of souvenirs on the destination image and destination behavior intention from the perspective of recipients. This may also be a new approach to understanding the image formation of the destination of non-visitors, through perception and experience of recipients who never visited the destination where souvenirs were bought. Additionally, researchers can also conduct comparative studies to explore whether the influence of souvenir tourism on the behavior intentions of recipients is different in the two contexts (domestic tourism and international tourism).