Abstract
This work aims to present a systematic review of the literature on Scientific Tourism, in the Brazilian and international contexts. Through exploratory research and systematic and bibliometric reviews of the literature, in Web of Science, Scopus, and Publicações de Turismo databases, this study sought to identify scientific paper production related to the term “Scientific Tourism” until the present moment. A total of 32 articles were qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed, using Mendeley, Excel, QGIS and IRAMUTEQ software. Bibliometric laws were also verified. The main results point to a concentration of studies in 2016, and coming from European countries, especially from Poland. The articles were published in 23 journals from 13 countries, with emphasis on: Ido Movement for Culture, Annals of Tourism Research and Revista Brasileira de Ecoturismo. A total of 65 authors or co-authors were identified, the main ones being Polish: Wojciech J. Cynarski and Krzysztof Kubala. The categorization of themes around Scientific Tourism brings together discussions about scientific events and trips, nature tourism, education, geotourism, and socioeconomic development. Finally, there is a need for publications that deepen the theoretical discussion on Scientific Tourism.
Keywords
Scientific Tourism; Systematic Review; Bibliometrics
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Source: Adapted from 
Source: The authors, using Mendeley software with research data (2019).
Source: The authors, using Excel software with research data (2019).
* Note: The sample articles were numbered and are identified in the legend and on the map. However, there was a need to include letters for the organization of the legend: the articles were named with A, B, C when they presented, in their case studies, more than one geographical reference (example of article 18 that works with three different geographical areas of investigation: United Kingdom, New York, and Mexico, identified on the map as 18A, 18B and 18C). When the studies referred a country as the study area, its capital was marked, which occurred in articles 1, 13, and 25A and B (Costa Rica, Brazil, and China). When the study addressed a continent, its central point was marked (article 8). When there are specific areas within the same country, those areas were marked individually, like Brazil and its six case studies (7, 25A, 28, 29, 30 and 31). Article 16 was not marked because it is a theoretical study and the 19 does not address a study with a specific focus. Source: The authors, using QGIS software with research data (2019).
Source: The authors, using Excel software with research data (2019).
Source: The authors, using IRAMUTEQ software with research data (2019).
Source: The authors, using IRAMUTEQ software with research data (2019).
Source: The authors, using IRAMUTEQ software with research data (2019).