Promoting Vitality and Sustainable Development on Åstol Island: Insights from Local Perspectives

Islandness and identity

Research on islandness seeks to explain how geographic boundedness, identity, and everyday practices shape island life, yet empirical studies vary to the extent to which residents’ own interpretations of these dynamics are foregrounded (Baldacchino, 2006; Hay, 2006). Islandness refers to the sense of boundedness, distinct identity, and symbolic meaning that emerge from living in geographically limited and often peripheral contexts (Stratford, 2003). In Nordic archipelago research, scholars have emphasized how islandness is negotiated through maritime traditions, seasonal rhythms, and senses of belonging tied to place (Ronström, 2021). This study draws on the notion of islandness to explore how residents of Åstol describe the ‘essence’ of their island, and how such meanings connect to sustainability.

Peripheral challenges and marginalization

Studies of islands as peripheral spaces have predominantly focused on structural constraints such as economic dependency, service provision, and demographic change, often privileging macro-level analyses over locally articulated experiences of marginalization (Armstrong and Read, 2004). Limited access to services, dependence on external markets, and demographic pressures such as youth outmigration and aging populations often characterize small islands (Burnett and Danson, 2017; Kinossian, 2019). Swedish islands, despite their cultural importance, experience similar structural inequalities. Understanding Åstol’s sustainability therefore requires situating it within broader discussions of peripherality and marginalization.

Tourism, seasonality and place-based approaches

Literature on tourism and seasonality in island contexts has largely examined economic impacts and governance challenges, while fewer studies explore how people living on and connected to islands negotiate tensions between economic necessity, cultural identity, and long-term sustainability. The summer months bring an influx of visitors, boosting local businesses, while the winter months pose challenges due to decreased economic activity (Baldacchino and Fairbairn, 2006; Hjerpe and Syssner, 2014). Seasonal fluctuations complicate long-term planning, as infrastructure and services must accommodate both peak and off-season needs. For islands without fixed mainland connections, enduring logistical constraints further exacerbate these challenges (Armstrong and Read, 2004).

While tourism is economically vital, it is not without risks. Unregulated growth can erode cultural identity and strain limited resources. Recent studies highlight the value of community-based tourism (CBT) as a planning framework, emphasizing active participation by island residents and other island-connected actors to ensure that tourism development aligns with place-specific values (Sayuti, 2023). Inter-island collaboration has also gained attention to diversify tourism offerings, reduce seasonal vulnerability, and strengthen cultural ties (Abe and Pischulti, 2024). Åstol, with its combination of permanent and seasonal residents, provides an opportunity to analyze how different groups connected to the island balance these dynamics and negotiate future development trajectories.

Resilience, social capital and agency

Resilience research highlights the capacity of people and social relations tied to specific places to adapt and sustain everyday life in the face of change, with social capital identified as a key adaptive resource. However, there remains limited empirical insight into how social capital is differently mobilized across varying forms of attachment to place, such as permanent and seasonal residence, in small-island contexts (Berkes and Ross, 2013; Putnam, 2000; Woolcock, 2001).

In island contexts, strong local networks can both compensate for structural disadvantages and shape distinctive forms of everyday social vitality. This study therefore examines how permanent residents, seasonal inhabitants, and visitors contribute in different ways to Åstol’s social capital and to processes of sustainability.

Policy frameworks: Agenda 2030 and SDGs

Sustainability strategies increasingly emphasize the inclusion of peripheral and rural places. The United Nations’ Agenda 2030 highlights the need to make all human settlements, urban and rural, ‘inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’ (Global Goals, 2020). Article 11a further emphasizes strengthening linkages between urban, peri-urban, and rural regions. Scholars note, however, that locally grounded perspectives are often underrepresented in these frameworks (Syssner, 2020). By focusing on Åstol, this study contributes to bridging the gap between global policy goals and place-based lived experiences of sustainability.

In this article, social relations are understood as place-based and grounded in shared practices rather than formal membership alone. Adaptive capacity refers to the ability of people and social relations connected to the island to respond to social, economic, and environmental changes through flexibility, cooperation, and local initiative. Social capital is conceptualized as everyday networks of trust, reciprocity, and mutual support. Cultural identity denotes shared meanings, traditions, and narratives connected to island life, while ecological awareness refers to locally grounded understandings of environmental limits and stewardship shaped through daily interaction with the island environment.

Taken together, existing research provides important insights into islandness, peripherality, tourism, and resilience, yet it tends to privilege structural conditions, policy frameworks, or sector-specific analyses. Less attention has been paid to how these dimensions intersect in the everyday lives of people living on and connected to islands and how sustainability is understood and enacted across different forms of attachment to the same place. This study addresses this gap by examining place-based perspectives on Åstol, thereby linking core themes in island studies to lived experiences of sustainability and vitality.

Participants

Participants were recruited using a combination of convenience and snowball sampling, both established strategies for qualitative research in settings (Bryman, 2016; Patton, 2015). Recruitment was initiated through announcements on local social media platforms and physical notices at key locations across the island (e.g., the harbor, local store, ferry terminal), open for three consecutive weeks during the summer. Individuals with different types of relationships to Åstol were invited to participate, and some were recommended by others already interviewed, expanding variation in the sample (Noy, 2008).

A total of 64 individuals participated, representing five categories: 16 full-time residents, 8 part-time residents, 6 long-term tourists (several days or a week), and 34 day visitors and marina guests. To include business perspectives, a subset of both full-time and part-time residents were local entrepreneurs. Participant identities sometimes overlapped: for instance, a household might include both a permanent and a part-time resident, or a former seasonal visitor who had moved to the island permanently. These dynamic relationships were not separated analytically but treated as part of the nuanced picture of island belonging.

Twenty-two individuals (aged 20–76; women M = 52.2; men M = 53.7) participated in in-depth semi-structured interviews (face-to-face, telephone, or email). Interviews lasted 30–75 minutes and were audio-recorded (with consent) and transcribed verbatim. The remaining participants (aged 26–72) provided written responses to the same interview guide through open-ended questionnaires. This was particularly suited to day visitors and marina guests, whose shorter but still valuable contributions complemented the in-depth interviews. It is important to note that data collection differed across participant groups. Permanent and part-time residents were primarily interviewed through in-depth semi-structured interviews, allowing for follow-up questions and more elaborated reflections. In contrast, most visitors and marina guests provided written responses to the same interview guide, typically completed on-site using pen and paper. While this approach enabled the inclusion of groups that would otherwise be difficult to reach, it also resulted in more concise responses with limited opportunity for probing.

The varying depth across groups is both a limitation and a strength. Day visitors generally provided concise answers, while residents and part-time inhabitants offered more detailed reflections. This heterogeneity, while uneven, broadened the spectrum of perspectives included in the analysis.

Design and Analysis

This study employed an inductive, qualitative research design with a place-based and participatory orientation, aiming to explore local perspectives on sustainability without testing predefined hypotheses. The design was grounded in the action plan developed by Åstol’s project group during the Maritime Service and Tourism initiative (Göthe et al., 2020), which emphasized sustainable island development through engagement in four priority areas: housing, collaboration, cultural heritage, and external communication. These themes informed both the interview guide and the analytical framework.

The analytical process integrated phenomenographic and thematic approaches. Phenomenography was applied first to identify qualitative variation in how participants conceptualized sustainability and island life (Marton, 1981). This step enabled us to capture differences in experiences of core phenomena such as tranquility, everyday life, and service provision. These categories of description then informed the thematic analysis (Table 1).

Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was used to systematize these variations across the dataset, identifying recurring patterns and cross-cutting themes. Following Braun and Clarke’s six-phase model, the process included (1) familiarization with data, (2) generating initial codes, (3) identifying broader patterns, (4) reviewing and refining categories, (5) defining and naming themes, and (6) presenting results with illustrative quotes. This ensured that both individual variation (captured through phenomenography) and overarching patterns (identified through thematic analysis) were represented.

The analysis was iterative and reflexive, remaining open to unexpected insights while grounded in the study aims and thematic areas from the action plan. Themes were not imposed in advance but developed through close reading of the material in dialogue with the research questions. To address the uneven depth of data across groups, the analysis prioritized patterns of meaning rather than frequency of responses. Visitors’ accounts were primarily used to contextualize perceptions of the island and to contrast resident perspectives, while interpretations of sustainability, adaptive capacity, and long-term development were grounded mainly in the more detailed narratives provided by permanent and part-time residents.

Procedure

Interviews were conducted using multiple formats, including face-to-face, telephone, email, and pen-and-paper, to accommodate participants’ varying availability. Full-time and part-time residents were primarily interviewed in person or by phone, while day visitors and marina guests were offered a printed version of the guide. This enabled broad participation but also introduced variation in data richness.

Face-to-face and phone interviews allowed for probing and clarification, while written responses were more concise. This heterogeneity is considered both a limitation and a strength: it introduced unevenness in detail but broadened inclusion of otherwise underrepresented groups.

All interview formats followed the same semi-structured guide, which included six thematic sections with overarching and probing questions. Interviews typically lasted 30–75 minutes. All verbal interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, while written responses were transcribed manually. Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Ethical principles were integrated throughout the research process in accordance with the four requirements formulated by the Swedish Research Council (2017). First, participants were fully informed about the purpose, design, procedures, and voluntary nature of the study (information requirement). Second, participation was based on informed consent, with the explicit right to withdraw at any time without negative consequences (consent requirement). Third, data were handled with strict confidentiality: all responses were stored securely, identifying details were removed from transcripts, and no unauthorized individuals had access (confidentiality requirement). Finally, the data was used solely for the purposes of this research (utilization requirement). The study involved adult participants and non-sensitive questions and therefore did not require formal approval by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. The Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2013) is referenced as a general research ethics principle.

Results

This section presents three overarching themes that emerged from the empirical material: (1) perceptions of the island, (2) services and resources, and (3) engagement and participation. These themes capture both shared experiences and individual differences among participants.

The study involved 64 participants, initially categorized into five groups: 16 full-time residents, 8 part-time residents, 6 recurring tourists (staying several days to a week), and approximately 34 day visitors and marina guests. While these categories were useful for ensuring a range of perspectives, the analysis indicated that intra-group variation often exceeded inter-group differences. For example, full-time residents expressed divergent views on key challenges, and part-time residents held differing opinions about future development.

Although certain patterns emerged, such as day visitors tending to offer more general or surface-level impressions, no clear or consistent divisions were observed along categorical lines. Instead, factors such as length and nature of connection to the island, age, and degree of engagement appeared to play a more significant role in shaping participants’ perspectives. As a result, findings are presented thematically rather than by participant category. Where relevant, distinctions and commonalities across groups are highlighted to enrich the analysis.

Perception of the island

Participants’ accounts of Åstol reveal that perceptions of the island are shaped by a combination of physical environment, cultural traditions, and social relations. Across groups, three recurring dimensions stand out: the everyday experience of the island, the deeper sense of its essence, and the symbolic meanings attached to tranquility, nature, and social relations. These dimensions overlap but can be distinguished analytically, allowing us to see both shared and diverging ways of conceptualizing what makes Åstol unique.

Similar descriptions of silence, darkness, and sensory closeness to nature were expressed across participant groups. Perceptions of what Åstol offers vary across participant groups, yet a common theme is the island’s tranquil atmosphere. Many emphasize the importance of spending several days on the island to fully appreciate its natural beauty and sense of calm. Here tranquility is consistently defined as rooted in the natural and social environment, avoiding earlier contradictory formulations.

Part-time residents, tourists, and some full-time residents highlighted the value of sun, swimming, and access to amenities such as the restaurant, café, grocery store, and transport links. These services are described as enhancing, rather than defining, the experience of calm and meaningful leisure.

Among full-time residents, there is broad consensus on the importance of basic services, not only for tourism but for maintaining everyday life. Key functions include the food store, café, restaurant, postal and pharmacy services (via the store), book exchange, library, marina, museum, and gallery. While most residents recognize the economic necessity of summer tourism, there is strong resistance to further commercialization. Instead, participants emphasized preserving Åstol’s authenticity and aligning visitor experiences with the island’s cultural and environmental values.

A discrepancy emerges between resident ideals and tourist behavior. While residents stress nature and calm as core to the Åstol experience, many day visitors and marina guests engage differently. Three main motivations for visiting Åstol were identified among tourists: (1) exploring nature, (2) using available services and recreational features, and (3) practical needs such as waiting out weather or shopping. These practical uses of the island’s services were considered meaningful by both residents and visitors, reinforcing the relevance of service provision as part of Åstol’s sustainable future.

Being close to nature, tranquility, and the people are recurring concepts used to describe the essence and attraction of Åstol. This differs from ‘experiencing the island’: here the emphasis lies in deeper belonging, history, and cultural continuity.

Across groups, differences are clear. Full- and part-time residents stress the social environment and place-based belonging, while tourists more often emphasize the natural landscape and cultural curiosity. Despite this, overlapping values, such as tranquility and friendliness, appear across groups, showing how shared understandings emerge despite divergent perspectives.

Context, people, and friendliness are repeatedly mentioned as reasons why participants want to stay on Åstol. While this is strongest among residents, many tourists also highlight social openness and friendliness, often based on personal ties or repeated visits. This illustrates how social integration is not exclusive to residents.

Tranquility and relaxation are consistently described as central to Åstol’s essence. Some residents describe moving to the island as an escape from hectic life, while part-time residents note that the calming effect returns each time they arrive. Tourists also perceive Åstol as a stress-free zone. By framing tranquility as both nature-based and socially grounded, earlier contradictions are removed.

The island’s unique natural environment was highlighted by both residents and tourists. Tourists emphasized architecture, the harbor, and picturesque scenery, while residents stressed the legacy of fishing, the church, and informal social rules. This distinction clarifies how cultural heritage is differently interpreted across groups.

Services and resources

Across interviews, participants emphasized the interdependence of services on the island, describing them as forming a fragile but mutually reinforcing system.

Activities and engagement

This theme explores how participants relate to Åstol through diverse forms of engagement: economic, voluntary, and social. Together these activities create a sense of vitality that extends beyond commercial services to include cultural life, informal support, and civic responsibility.