Agentic AI in Tourism Management: Capital, Institutions, and World-Systems Dynamics in a Week of Rapid Change

Author: Temir Saparov — Affiliation: Independent Researcher

Abstract

Agentic artificial intelligence (AI)—software systems capable of perceiving goals, taking actions, and learning from feedback with limited human supervision—has moved from pilot experiments to early deployment across the tourism value chain. This article examines how agentic AI is reshaping tourism management at the level of destinations, firms, and travelers. It asks: What forms of value and risk do agentic systems generate? How do institutional pressures shape adoption and governance? And how do global power relations structure who benefits and who bears costs? Using a theory-driven, mixed-method conceptual approach, the study integrates Bourdieu’s concept of capital, world-systems theory, and institutional isomorphism to build a framework for analyzing current developments. The analysis organizes new practices into six domains—market intelligence, service operations, revenue and yield management, mobility and capacity coordination, experience design, and risk/ethics management—and maps cross-cutting effects on labor, data infrastructures, and sustainability. Findings suggest that agentic AI acts as a field-reconfiguring technology: it converts multiple capitals, accelerates mimetic adoption across competing organizations, and amplifies core–periphery inequalities in data and compute access. At the same time, it opens practical paths to smoother low-season demand, better accessibility, and more resilient destination logistics when carefully governed. The article concludes with a governance and capability roadmap for destinations and firms, balancing innovation with accountability through capability audits, sandboxes, impact measurement, and multi-stakeholder standards.

1. Introduction

Tourism is an information-rich sector in which small changes in search, pricing, or coordination can alter flows of people and capital at scale. The arrival of agentic AI—autonomous or semi-autonomous software that can plan, call tools, negotiate, and act—pushes this sensitivity further. Unlike earlier rule-based chatbots or isolated predictive models, agentic systems can sequence complex tasks: collecting live signals, generating options, testing micro-interventions, and adapting strategies in real time.

Recent weeks have seen strong public attention to agentic assistants for trip planning, hotel operations, transport coordination, and dynamic merchandising. Managers now face a two-sided challenge. On one side is the opportunity to convert data frictions into productivity, personalization, and smoother guest journeys. On the other side are difficult questions about labor substitution, algorithmic opacity, vendor lock-in, and uneven access to compute and data. This paper offers a high-level, accessible, and theory-grounded analysis of these dynamics, designed for tourism executives, destination managers, and policy stakeholders who need both conceptual clarity and practical guidance.

The paper develops three contributions:

1. A field perspective that explains why some destinations and firms move quickly, while others lag or imitate, drawing on Bourdieu, DiMaggio and Powell, and world-systems theory.

2. A six-domain map of agentic AI use cases that are already maturing in tourism management.

3. A governance and capability roadmap balancing innovation and accountability.

The writing uses simple English and avoids technical jargon where possible while preserving the rigor expected in a journal-level analysis.

2. Background and Theoretical Foundations

2.1 Bourdieu’s Capitals in the Tourism Field

Bourdieu conceptualized society as composed of fields in which actors struggle to accumulate and convert forms of capital—economic (financial resources), social (networks and relationships), cultural (knowledge and credentials), and symbolic (recognition and prestige). Tourism is such a field, where destinations, platforms, and firms deploy capital to attract flows of visitors, investments, and attention.

Agentic AI alters capital conversion in three ways:

• Data-to-symbolic conversion: Destinations that mobilize data effectively gain symbolic capital (reputation for seamlessness, sustainability, or safety), which then attracts further demand and partnerships.

• Cultural-to-economic conversion: Staff who can design prompts, orchestrate tools, and audit outputs convert cultural capital (skills and tacit knowledge) into direct revenue gains via yield, merchandising, and upselling.

• Social-to-data conversion: Community relationships influence consent for data sharing and access to local knowledge, which improves model alignment to resident preferences.

In short, agentic AI reshuffles who has the “right” capital at the right time and lowers the cost of converting one form to another.

2.2 Institutional Isomorphism and the Race to Deploy

DiMaggio and Powell argued that organizations become similar over time through coercive (regulatory), mimetic (imitation under uncertainty), and normative (professional standards) pressures. Agentic AI intensifies all three:

• Coercive: Data protection and consumer-protection regulations increasingly require traceability and consent management for automated decisions.

• Mimetic: Hotels, airlines, and online intermediaries copy early adopters’ highly visible agentic features—e.g., autonomous concierge or proactive re-routing—especially in volatile markets.

• Normative: Professional associations and standards bodies publish guidance on safe deployment, creating norms for audit trails, model evaluation, and incident response.

Isomorphism explains why similar agentic features appear concurrently across competing brands and why “fast followers” can catch up quickly once templates and vendors stabilize.

2.3 World-Systems Theory and the Compute/Data Core

World-systems theory views the global economy as structured by a core, semi-periphery, and periphery, differentiated by control over high-value production factors. In agentic AI, the “core” consists of entities with preferential access to advanced models, compute, and high-quality data. The semi-periphery includes destinations and firms that can rent such capabilities but with constraints. The periphery comprises operators and communities whose data are extracted without commensurate returns or who face exclusion due to language, bandwidth, or cost barriers.

This lens highlights a paradox: tourism thrives on peripheries and margins, but the digital infrastructure that orchestrates flows tends to centralize. Governance thus becomes a project of negotiating fair terms for data contribution, local capacity building, and reinvestment of AI productivity gains.

3. Method: A Theory-Driven, Mixed-Method Conceptual Synthesis

The article uses a mixed-method conceptual methodology:

1. Theory Integration: We synthesize Bourdieu’s capital theory, institutional isomorphism, and world-systems theory to build an integrated framework for agentic AI in tourism.

2. Practice Scan: We categorize current agentic practices into six domains based on public case descriptions, industry playbooks, and operations literature, focusing on tasks rather than specific vendors or proprietary systems.

3. Analytical Mapping: We map observed practices against our framework to identify mechanisms (capital conversion, isomorphic pressures, core–periphery dynamics) and to surface governance gaps.

4. Prescriptive Design: We propose a set of governance instruments and capability investments aligned to the framework.

The method is appropriate for a fast-moving topic in which empirical data are uneven but actionable insights are urgently needed.

4. Analysis: Six Domains of Agentic AI in Tourism Management

4.1 Market Intelligence and Demand Shaping

What changes: Agentic systems continuously gather signals (search queries, social media sentiment, climate events, major conferences, currency shifts), plan hypothesis tests (e.g., “promote shoulder-season heritage routes to specific segments”), and autonomously run micro-campaigns. They then evaluate results—click-throughs, look-to-book ratios, and booking curves—and adapt messaging and inventory placement.

Capital dynamics: Cultural capital (staff who know the place) merges with data capital (instrumented funnels). Symbolic capital accrues to destinations that are seen as timely and authentic. Economic capital is realized through smoother load factors and reduced last-minute discounting.

Institutional pressures: Mimetic isomorphism drives convergence on similar campaign archetypes (sustainability angles, local heritage, inclusive access), while normative pressures encourage standardized consent language and data-minimization practices.

Core–periphery risk: When demand-shaping models are trained predominantly on core-language data, peripheral attractions risk invisibility. Mitigation requires multilingual corpora and local knowledge graphs.

4.2 Service Operations and the Autonomous Concierge

What changes: Hotels and attractions deploy agentic concierges that plan tasks: anticipating arrivals, checking profiles and constraints (allergies, accessibility, religious observances), pre-arranging amenities, and coordinating with housekeeping and front-of-house. For attractions, agents manage queue-balancing and suggest time-shifting or alternative routes.

Capital dynamics: Social capital (relationships with local providers) becomes machine-actionable via structured vendor directories and service-level agreements. Cultural capital (hospitality know-how) moves into playbooks that agents execute.

Institutional pressures: Coercive pressure rises around safety—agents must verify identity and avoid over-booking. Normative pressure calls for incident logs and red-team routines.

Core–periphery risk: Smaller properties may rely on external platforms for agentic orchestration, risking dependency. Shared municipal platforms and cooperatives can protect local autonomy.

4.3 Revenue, Yield, and Merchandising

What changes: Agentic yield managers run continuous experiments across bundles (room + mobility + local experiences), time windows, and loyalty tiers. Agents negotiate micro-incentives with travelers—late check-out, meal credits, or upgrades—balancing utilization and margins.

Capital dynamics: Economic capital (cash flow) stabilizes as agents smooth peaks and troughs. Symbolic capital improves when guests perceive fairness and transparency in offers.

Institutional pressures: Mimetic pressure accelerates adoption of agentic yield practices once early movers show improved RevPAR and take rates. Normative pressure encourages explainability: why a price or bundle was offered.

Core–periphery risk: If peripheral suppliers cannot publish machine-readable inventory, they are excluded from bundles. Public–private data collaboratives that standardize schemas reduce this risk.

4.4 Mobility, Capacity, and Destination Flow Management

What changes: Destinations use agentic coordination to match transport capacity to visitor flows, balancing tourism with resident needs. Agents call APIs for transit, bike shares, parking occupancy, and pedestrian sensors, and then issue nudges: staggered entries, preferred corridors, or off-peak incentives.

Capital dynamics: Symbolic capital accrues to destinations perceived as livable and sustainable. Cultural capital among planners is codified into rules that agents can interpret and adapt.

Institutional pressures: Coercive pressure appears through safety and crowd-control regulation; normative pressure emerges as professional bodies share playbooks for “agentic mobility”.

Core–periphery risk: Peripheral neighborhoods risk displacement if agentic routing funnels visitors elsewhere. Transparent targets and community oversight align flows with local priorities.

4.5 Experience Design and Content Co-Creation

What changes: Agentic creators co-design itineraries with guests, composing stories from local archives, oral histories, and cultural practices while ensuring accuracy and respect. In museums and heritage sites, agents adapt narratives to age, language, and accessibility needs and can trigger sensory or AR elements.

Capital dynamics: Cultural capital—embodied in local narratives—enters digital circulation while preserving provenance. Social capital strengthens when communities are co-authors.

Institutional pressures: Normative pressure emphasizes authenticity, consent for cultural content, and benefit-sharing. Mimetic pressure drives similar “co-creation studios” across destinations.

Core–periphery risk: Without safeguards, communities may lose control of their stories. Data trusts and community-owned IP models support equitable participation.

4.6 Risk, Resilience, and Ethics Management

What changes: Agentic systems monitor signals for extreme weather, health advisories, or supply disruptions; they pre-plan evacuation routes, re-accommodation, and dynamic refunds. Agents also enforce policy constraints: accessibility prioritization, quiet hours in residential zones, or water-use caps during droughts.

Capital dynamics: Symbolic capital is tied to trust; destinations that handle disruptions smoothly gain reputational advantage. Economic capital is protected by faster recovery.

Institutional pressures: Coercive pressures include consumer refunds and safety mandates. Normative standards evolve for incident post-mortems, bias review, and human-in-the-loop settings.

Core–periphery risk: Peripheral operators may lack the instrumentation needed for inclusion in resilience plans. Regional funds and shared infrastructure can close these gaps.

5. Cross-Cutting Impacts

5.1 Labor and Skills

Agentic AI changes job content rather than simply eliminating positions. New roles include orchestration designers (who build agent workflows), data stewards (who manage provenance and consent), and AI auditors (who stress-test outputs and safety). Front-line roles shift toward high-touch interaction and exception handling. Training must broaden cultural capital—languages, accessibility, and conflict mediation—and deepen digital skills.

5.2 Data and Platform Economies

Agentic performance depends on high-quality, well-governed data: availability calendars, route capacities, ESG constraints, and granular product attributes. The strategic choice is whether to rely on closed vendor ecosystems or to invest in open, interoperable data meshes at the destination level. The latter route increases local autonomy and reduces lock-in, but requires coordination and governance capacity.

5.3 Sustainability and Social License

Agents can lower emissions and congestion by spreading demand, promoting public transport, and rewarding low-impact choices. Yet, efficiency can rebound into higher total consumption if not guided by policy. Social license depends on consentful data use, cultural respect, and benefit-sharing mechanisms, particularly in communities that historically experienced extraction without returns.

6. Findings

Finding 1: Agentic AI is a field-reconfiguring technology.It lowers the cost of converting cultural, social, and data capital into economic and symbolic capital. Early movers gain reputational advantages that further attract partnerships, talent, and investment.

Finding 2: Isomorphic pressures accelerate adoption but can produce shallow implementations.Mimetic adoption spreads surface-level features (e.g., “autonomous concierge”) without the governance depth needed for reliability. Normative standards help, but destinations still require internal auditing capabilities.

Finding 3: Core–periphery inequalities are reproduced in data and compute access.Destinations and firms with limited capital can rent agentic capabilities, but often on terms that extract local value. Shared infrastructure, public interest data agreements, and capacity building are necessary for equitable benefits.

Finding 4: Value clusters around six domains.The most immediate returns appear in yield/merchandising and service operations, while the largest social benefits arise in mobility coordination, accessibility, and resilience.

Finding 5: Human expertise remains central.Agentic systems are amplifiers of local knowledge, not replacements. Performance and trust hinge on staff who can encode tacit know-how into workflows and who can intervene when context shifts.

Finding 6: Measurable impact requires explicit metrics and transparent reporting.Outcomes should be tracked against service targets (wait times, complaint rates), sustainability goals (emissions per visitor day), inclusion (accessibility satisfaction), and resilience (recovery time after disruption).

7. Governance and Capability Roadmap

7.1 Capability Audits and Role Design

• Inventory decisions and flows where agents may operate (pricing, routing, content personalization, refunds).

• Define roles: owner (accountable), operator (maintains), auditor (tests), and responder (handles incidents).

• Map capital effects: whose cultural knowledge is being encoded? How will benefits be shared?

7.2 Data Governance and Provenance

• Establish data catalogs with provenance, consent tags, and retention rules.

• Adopt minimum viable interoperability: shared schemas for availability, capacity, vouchers, and accessibility attributes.

• Implement community data agreements for cultural and environmental datasets, including benefit-sharing.

7.3 Risk Controls and Sandboxes

• Use sandboxes to test agent behaviors under stress (surge demand, weather shocks, outages).

• Maintain kill-switches and fallback playbooks for human takeover.

• Require explainability summaries: why was a route, price, or bundle chosen?

7.4 Procurement and Vendor Strategy

• Avoid single-vendor dependence where possible; prefer modular architectures.

• Contract for exportability of workflows, access logs, and bias audit support.

• Include ESG clauses (energy disclosure, localization, accessibility) in agreements.

7.5 Workforce Development

• Build cross-functional “agent studios” pairing operations, IT, and community experts.

• Offer micro-credentials in prompt design, tool orchestration, and audit methods.

• Recognize and reward cultural translators who ensure local narratives are represented accurately.

7.6 Measurement, Reporting, and Social License

• Track a balanced scorecard:

  • Service: time-to-resolution, NPS, queue variance.

  • Sustainability: modal share shifts, emissions per visitor hour.

  • Inclusion: accessibility satisfaction, multilingual coverage, distribution of benefits to SMEs.

  • Resilience: detection-to-response time, re-accommodation success.

• Publish plain-language transparency reports so residents and travelers understand how agents affect their experience.

8. Practical Scenarios

Scenario A: Shoulder-Season Destination

A coastal town experiences extreme summer peaks and quiet winters. Agentic yield managers experiment with bundled off-season stays that integrate regional rail passes and cultural events. Market-intelligence agents identify segments responsive to “workcation” offers. Mobility agents ensure reliable, low-emission access. Outcome: stabilized cash flow, lower resident stress, and improved emissions intensity.

Scenario B: Heritage City with Resident Fatigue

A heritage center faces congestion at a handful of “postcard” sites. Agentic concierges nudge visitors to alternative heritage routes and coordinate timed entries. Experience-design agents co-create stories with local historians, elevating lesser-known districts. Governance includes community oversight and revenue-sharing for peripheral neighborhoods.

Scenario C: Island Destination Facing Disruption

A storm disrupts ferry schedules. Risk-management agents re-book visitors across carriers, push safety alerts, and offer compensation options aligned with policy. Post-event audits refine evacuation playbooks and improve supplier data contracts.

9. Discussion

9.1 Beyond Efficiency

Tourism’s value is not only economic; it is cultural exchange and place stewardship. Agentic AI can mechanize empathy poorly if it optimizes for short-term clicks. Governance must align agent objectives with visitor flourishing and resident wellbeing, not only revenue.

9.2 Equity by Design

Without intentional design, agentic systems may channel demand to already privileged attractions, deepening inequality. Equity requires distributional goals: minimum share of itineraries featuring peripheral areas, accessibility quotas in bundles, and local-language content parity.

9.3 The Learning Destination

Destinations should treat agentic deployment as continuous learning. Open measurement, rotating audits, and multi-stakeholder councils help align system behavior with evolving norms and values.

10. Conclusion

Agentic AI in tourism management is real, accelerating, and transformative. Through the lenses of capital conversion (Bourdieu), institutional isomorphism (DiMaggio & Powell), and world-systems dynamics, we see both the drivers of rapid adoption and the risks of consolidation and inequality. Six domains—market intelligence, service operations, yield, mobility, experience design, and risk—provide concrete starting points for managers. The governance and capability roadmap—capability audits, interoperable data, sandboxes, workforce development, and transparent measurement—keeps innovation aligned with destination values and social license. The central message is simple: agentic AI should augment human hospitality and community priorities, not replace them. With thoughtful stewardship, the technology can help tourism become more resilient, inclusive, and sustainable in the weeks and years ahead.

Hashtags

#AgenticAI #TourismManagement #SmartDestinations #SustainableTravel #ServiceInnovation #DataGovernance #InclusiveTourism

References

• Bourdieu, P. (1986). “The Forms of Capital.” In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education.

• Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice.

• Buhalis, D. (2019). “Technology in Tourism—From Information Communication Technologies to eTourism and Smart Tourism.” Tourism Management.

• DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review.

• Floridi, L. (2014). The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere Is Reshaping Human Reality.

• Gretzel, U., Sigala, M., Xiang, Z., & Koo, C. (2015). “Smart Tourism: Foundations and Developments.” Electronic Markets.

• Gretzel, U., & Werthner, H. (Eds.). (2022). Handbook of e-Tourism.

• Guttentag, D. (2015). “Airbnb: Disruptive Innovation and the Rise of an Informal Tourism Accommodation Sector.” Current Issues in Tourism.

• Hall, C. M., Gössling, S., & Scott, D. (2015). Tourism and Sustainability.

• Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (4th ed.).

• Sigala, M. (2020). Social Media in Travel, Tourism and Hospitality: Theory, Practice and Cases (2nd ed.).

• Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities.

• Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System, Vol. 1.

• Xiang, Z., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2017). “Big Data Analytics, Tourism Design and Smart Tourism.” Journal of Destination Marketing & Management.

• Yeoman, I. (2012). 2050—Tomorrow’s Tourism.

• Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism.