Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Asimenia Salepaki
 -- 1289 2023-09-29 08:22:55 |
2 layout
Jessie Wu
 + 8 word(s) 1297 2023-10-07 03:46:05 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Kourkouridis, D.; Salepaki, A. Tourism, Persons with Disabilities and Cross-Border Cooperation. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/49789 (accessed on 17 May 2024).
Kourkouridis D, Salepaki A. Tourism, Persons with Disabilities and Cross-Border Cooperation. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/49789. Accessed May 17, 2024.
Kourkouridis, Dimitris, Asimenia Salepaki. "Tourism, Persons with Disabilities and Cross-Border Cooperation" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/49789 (accessed May 17, 2024).
Kourkouridis, D., & Salepaki, A. (2023, September 29). Tourism, Persons with Disabilities and Cross-Border Cooperation. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/49789
Kourkouridis, Dimitris and Asimenia Salepaki. "Tourism, Persons with Disabilities and Cross-Border Cooperation." Encyclopedia. Web. 29 September, 2023.
Tourism, Persons with Disabilities and Cross-Border Cooperation
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su151914093

Tourism for persons with disabilities (PwD) is a research field that began to concern researchers in the late 1980s when it was realized that although these people have equal rights to travel, they have to face a series of obstacles. By definition, social tourism refers to people for whom travel is a challenging experience. The barriers and constraints faced by the elderly and PwD during their participation in tourism have been thoroughly studied. Both the accessible tourism market and cross-border cooperation are directly linked to the sustainability of tourism.

Person with Disabilities (PwD) accessible tourism cross-border cooperation collaborative tourism marketing

1. Tourism and Persons with Disabilities

The market of persons with disabilities (PwD) and those with access needs is still underserved by the tourism industry, even though this market comprises about 10% of the world’s population. In several countries of the Western world this percentage reaches 15–20%, with a significant contribution of the aging population [1]. It is a fact that 35% of people over the age of 65 have some kind of disability [2]. In order for this market to be developed and meet this significant demand, barriers to participation must be removed [3]. The lack of accessibility is one of the main deterrents for these people to participate in tourism activities [4][5][6][7][8], as well as the lack of staff training in tourism businesses [7][8][9][10][11][12]. These are macro-systemic environmental factors of the destination that lie outside the sphere of influence of PwD [8].
The literature in recent years has increasingly focused attention on the supply side, with accessible tourism strongly linked to social tourism [13]. Social tourism is a policy that favors the inclusion of people with disabilities in tourism in a sustainable way [14], as by definition social tourism seeks to include people who would otherwise not have the opportunity to participate in tourism [15]. Social tourism is more socially oriented and not so economically; therefore, it has the potential to contribute to tourist destinations based on sustainability criteria. Given the potential of accessible tourism, the competitiveness of sustainable tourism development is related to innovations in the provision of tourism services for the elderly and PwD, while at the same time the challenges of social tourism should be addressed [16].
The realization of the need to include all people in the built environment led to Universal Design which from a broader perspective refers to ‘a process that enables and empowers a diverse population by improving human performance, health and wellness, and social participation’ [17]. In particular, tourism businesses should include all the necessary equipment to ensure that all visitors can experience unhindered the services they provide [18]. To assess the accessibility of buildings, some basic characteristics are used, such as parking areas, building entrances, and toilets [19]. More specifically in the hotel sector, some important accessibility features can be the following: wheelchair free movement, grab bars in the toilets, lower sinks, higher level toilets, cords for emergency use, visual aids (Braille, tactile signs, etc.), and audio guidance [20]. Moreover, the availability of accessible rooms is also an important accessibility factor for accommodation businesses [19].
At this point, it should be pointed out that the accessibility features of buildings in many cases facilitate their use not only by PwD but by all users. For example, when the entrance to a public building—such as a hotel—does not have height differences and uses a photocell to automatically open the door, then not only PwD are facilitated, but also customers carrying a suitcase, or a child’s stroller, etc. This is the World Health Organization’s [21] approach to accessibility, which actually serves a wide range of people, beyond PwD. This gives a competitive advantage to tourism businesses, as accessibility is an important quality factor of the tourist experience.
Apart from the physical accessibility of the buildings, however, the attitude of the staff of the businesses towards PwD is also found to be important as it is often an obstacle for their participation in tourism [7][9][10][11]. The training of tourism business staff is considered an important factor in properly serving people with disabilities [12][22], while it is shown that staff attitudes can be significantly improved by attending appropriate training programs [17]. The goal of training should be to acquire appropriate skills so that employees are able to offer their services to each customer, meeting their different and varied needs [14]. Eliminating discrimination should be the ultimate goal, through the adoption of principles that will actually change the business culture [23].

2. Cross-Border Cooperation and Tourism

Border regions are of special interest, not only at a national level but also in relation to cooperation between populations [19]. Thus, in recent years the issue of cross-border cooperation has been the subject of study both at the European Union level [24][25][26][27][28][29][30] and internationally, as in the case of the US–Mexico border [31][32] and Asia [33]. Borders are no longer considered as barriers to communication and relations between populations on either side of the border line, but as an opportunity for cooperation. The importance of establishing relationships with the other side of the border is of particular relevance for border areas, which are disadvantaged, compared to the hinterland [34], as borders cause processes of marginalization [35]. Cross-border flows, however, create a special space with significant growth potential [36], while the geopolitical importance often leads to dynamic tourist interest [37].
Cross-border cooperation, especially in the case of tourism, is closely related to the sustainable tourism development of these areas [38][39][40]. Moreover, this kind of cooperation can strengthen international relations between regions [41]. At the level of bilateral (or even tripartite in some cases) relations, a common type of cooperation between cross-border areas is that of cooperative tourism marketing that leads to mutual benefits for the countries involved [38][41][42]. Although this is a relatively recent field of research, the existing literature notes the benefits of such collaboration. Kozak and Buhalis [37] refer to a joint strategy of promoting cross-border destinations integrated into packages, especially for tourists from distant regions, which strengthens the competitiveness of the countries involved. Thus, the creation of clusters of similar tourism products in neighboring countries can offer specific types of tourism that can favor the participating countries in the international competitive environment [43].
Tosun et al. [38], studying the case of cooperation between Greece and the neighboring country of Turkey, found that cooperative tourism marketing strategies can lead to more efficient and effective marketing, but also ensure a stable and safe environment for visitors. Their study showed that significant challenges are the establishment of a joint tourism organization, the adequacy of financial resources, and the involvement of businesses and non-governmental organizations from both sides of the border.
Studying the case of cross-border cooperation between the USA and Canada in three international parks based on sustainable tourism development, Timothy [40] highlights the importance of bilateral treaties and less formal local cooperation in creating the foundations for sustainable management of cross-border tourism resources.
An interesting approach is that of Kirillova et al. [44], who highlight that in practice cooperation between tourism destinations is difficult, mainly due to the intense competition that exists between them. Thus, they use the “coopetition” approach for the relationships that can develop between cross-border destinations. According to this approach, the main “coopetitive” force is the resource heterogeneity between destinations, which is different but complementary. Their study, concerning the Greater Bay Area, reveals that a successful “coopetitive” brand should not downplay the unique characteristics of the destinations but focus on qualities that are common to both. Such a “coopetitive” approach aims to integrate the different destinations into a regional brand while allowing them to maintain their competitive positions in the region.
Both the accessible tourism market and cross-border cooperation are directly linked to the sustainability of tourism. In an intensely competitive international environment, differentiation through partnerships and specifically through collaborative tourism marketing is an important opportunity for cross-border regions. This becomes even more important as marketing strategies increasingly focus on niche markets [45] such as the market of accessible tourism [23].

References

  1. Kropinova, E. Transnational and cross-border cooperation for sustainable tourism development in the Baltic Sea Region. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2111.
  2. Darcy, S. Setting a Research Agenda for Accessible Tourism; CRC for Sustainable Tourism: Queensland, Australia, 2006.
  3. Dwyer, L.; Darcy, S. Economic contribution of tourists with disabilities: An Australian approach and methodology. In Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues; Buhalis, D., Darcy, S., Eds.; Channel View Publication: Bristol, UK; Buffalo, NY, USA; Toronto, ON, Canada, 2011; pp. 213–239.
  4. Zhang, Y.; Gao, J.; Cole, S.T.; Ricci, P. Beyond accessibility: Empowering mobility-impaired customers with motivation differentiation. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 31, 3503–3525.
  5. Cole, S.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, W.; Hu, C.M. The influence of accessibility and motivation on leisure travel participation of people with disabilities. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2019, 36, 119–130.
  6. German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology. Economic Impulses of Accesible Tourism for All; German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germamy, 2004.
  7. Eichhorn, V.; Buhalis, D. Accessibility: A key objective for the tourism industry. In Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues; Buhalis, D., Darcy, S., Eds.; Channel View Publication: Bristol, UK; Buffalo, NY, USA; Toronto, ON, Canada, 2011; pp. 46–61.
  8. Huber, D.; Milne, S.; Hyde, K. Constraints and facilitators for senior tourism. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2018, 27, 55–67.
  9. Avis, A.H.; Card, J.A.; Cole, S.T. Accessibility and attitudinal barriers encountered by travelers with physical disabilities. Tour. Rev. Int. 2005, 8, 239–248.
  10. Bi, Y.; Card, J.A.; Cole, S.T. Accessibility and attitudinal barriers encountered by Chinese travellers with physical disabilities. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2007, 9, 205–216.
  11. Pasca, M.G.; Elmo, G.C.; Arcese, G.; Cappelletti, G.M.; Martucci, O. Accessible tourism in protected natural areas: An empirical study in the Lazio region. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1736.
  12. Darcy, S. Setting a Research Agenda for Accessible Tourism; CRC for Sustainable Tourism: Queensland, Australia, 2006.
  13. McCabe, S.; Qiao, G. A review of research into social tourism: Launching the Annals of Tourism Research Curated Collection on Social Tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020, 85, 103103.
  14. Gillovic, B.; McIntosh, A. Accessibility and inclusive tourism development: Current state and future agenda. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9722.
  15. Minnaert, L.; Diekmann, A.; McCabe, S. Defining social tourism and its historical context. In Social Tourism in Europe: Theory and Practice; McCabe, S., Minnaert, L., Diekmann, A., Eds.; Channel View Publication: Bristol, UK; Buffalo, NY, USA; Toronto, ON, Canada, 2012; pp. 18–30.
  16. Streimikiene, D.; Svagzdiene, B.; Jasinskas, E.; Simanavicius, A. Sustainable tourism development and competitiveness: The systematic literature review. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 29, 259–271.
  17. Steinfeld, E.; Maisel, J. Universal Design: Creating Inclusive Environments; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012; p. 29.
  18. Liasidou, S.; Fella, K.; Stylianou, C. A sustainable destination is an accessible destination: Examining the relationship as a remedy to seasonality. Worldw. Hosp. Tour. Themes 2022, 14, 481–491.
  19. Carlsson, G.; Slaug, B.; Schmidt, S.M.; Norin, L.; Ronchi, E.; Gefenaite, G. A scoping review of public building accessibility. Disabil. Health J. 2022, 15, 101227.
  20. Sayed, M.S.; Elsaid, H. The Readiness of Accommodation Facilities to Provide Accessible Tourist Experiences in Cairo, Egypt. Int. J. Tour. Archaeol. Hosp. 2023, 3, 175–188.
  21. UNWTO. Manual on Accessible Tourism for All: Principles, Tools and Best Practices—Module I: Accessible Tourism—Definition and Context; World Tourism Organization: Madrid, Spain, 2016.
  22. Bizjak, B.; Knežević, M.; Cvetrežnik, S. Attitude change towards guests with disabilities: Reflections from tourism students. Ann. Tour. Res. 2011, 38, 842–857.
  23. Darcy, S.; Pegg, S. Towards strategic intent: Perceptions of disability service provision amongst hotel accommodation managers. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2011, 30, 468–476.
  24. Castanho, R.A.; Loures, L.; Cabezas, J.; Fernández-Pozo, L. Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) in southern europe—An iberian case study. The eurocity Elvas-Badajoz. Sustainability 2017, 9, 360.
  25. Pinnavaia, L.; Berisha, E. The role of cross-border territorial development. Evidences from Albania. In Governing Territorial Development in the Western Balkans: Challenges and Prospects of Regional Cooperation; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 309–332.
  26. Medeiros, E. Territorial impact assessment and cross-border cooperation. Reg. Stud. Reg. Sci. 2015, 2, 97–115.
  27. Martín-Uceda, J.; Vicente Rufí, J. Territorial development and cross-border cooperation: A review of the consequences of European INTERREG policies on the Spanish–French border (2007–2020). Sustainability 2021, 13, 12017.
  28. Berzi, M. Cross-border cooperation and local development in the Pyrenees. The Case of Cerdanya. Eur. J. Geogr. 2013, 4, 47–60.
  29. Sousa, L.D. Understanding European cross-border cooperation: A framework for analysis. J. Eur. Integr. 2013, 35, 669–687.
  30. Basboga, K. The role of open borders and cross-border cooperation in regional growth across Europe. Reg. Stud. Reg. Sci. 2020, 7, 532–549.
  31. Lara-Valencia, F. The “thickening” of the US–Mexico border: Prospects for cross-border networking and cooperation. J. Borderl. Stud. 2011, 26, 251–264.
  32. Herzog, L.A. Cross-border planning and cooperation. In The U.S.-Mexican Border Environment: A Road Map to Sustainable 2020; Ganster, P., Ed.; San Diego State University Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2020; pp. 139–161.
  33. Chan, R.C. Cross-border regional development in Southern China. GeoJournal 1998, 44, 225–237.
  34. Petrakos, G.; Psycharis, Y. Regional Development in Greece, 1st ed.; Kritiki: Athens, Greece, 2004.
  35. Syrett, S. Conceptualising marginalisation in cities and regions. In Regional Development in Northern Europe: Peripherality, Marginality and Border Issues, 1st ed.; Danson, M., De Souza, P., Eds.; Routledge: Oxford, UK, 2012; pp. 83–95.
  36. Dunets, A.N.; Gerasymchuk, N.A.; Kurikov, V.M.; Noeva, E.E.; Kuznetsova, M.Y.; Shichiyakh, R.A. Tourism management in border destinations: Regional aspects of sustainable development of protected natural areas. Entrep. Sustain. Issues 2020, 7, 3253.
  37. Więckowski, M. How border tripoints offer opportunities for transboundary tourism development. Tour. Geogr. 2023, 25, 310–333.
  38. Tosun, C.; Timothy, D.J.; Parpairis, A.; MacDonald, D. Cross-border cooperation in tourism marketing growth strategies. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2005, 18, 5–23.
  39. Kropinova, E. Transnational and cross-border cooperation for sustainable tourism development in the Baltic Sea Region. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2111.
  40. Timothy, D.J. Cross-border partnership in tourism resource management: International parks along the US-Canada border. J. Sustain. Tour. 1999, 7, 182–205.
  41. Timothy, D.J.; Saarinen, J. Cross-border co-operation and tourism in Europe. Trends Eur. Tour. Plan. Organ. 2013, 60, 64.
  42. Kozak, M.; Buhalis, D. Cross–border tourism destination marketing: Prerequisites and critical success factors. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2019, 14, 100392.
  43. Apostolopoulos, Y.; Sοnmez, S. New directions in Mediterranean tourism: Restructuring and cooperative marketing in the era of globalization. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 2000, 42, 381–392.
  44. Kirillova, K.; Park, J.; Zhu, M.; Dioko, L.D.; Zeng, G. Developing the coopetitive destination brand for the Greater Bay Area. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2020, 17, 100439.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Dimitris Kourkouridis
,
Asimenia Salepaki
View Times: 232
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 07 Oct 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Feedback