Artigo para publicacion de la MAW vl AG

Artículo para publicación de la MAW-UNIA

Accessible Tourism Destinations for All: a powerful tool for inclusion RESUMEN

Proporcionar soluciones de acceso para todas las personas en su experiencia turística es el objetivo final de cualquier proveedor de servicios de turismo que tiene un enfoque inclusivo a su oferta. Para muchos esto puede parecer utópico en que no hay "una" solución adecuada para "todos". Cada persona siempre será una persona con necesidades especiales o específicas, independientemente de su diversidad motora, sensorial, intelectual, lingüística o social. En el conocimiento de que el “Diseño para Todos” es todavía lo que más se acerca a la búsqueda de soluciones que respondan a la mayor cantidad posible de "usuarios", es a partir de ahí que cualquier estudio en turismo accesible debe salir a encontrar su camino en lo que hace específicamente el turismo una área tan importante para promover la igualdad de derechos y oportunidades para todos - los turistas y todos los grupos de interés que pueden ser directa o indirectamente involucrados en la cadena turística. En este artículo, el tema de "Turismo Accesible para Todos" se tratará de dos maneras distintas. Por un lado, premisas teóricas se establecerán - al hacer referencia a la legislación, las normas, las publicaciones académicas y profesionales - en un esfuerzo por aclarar conceptos y terminología que aún permanece borrosa para muchos. Por otra parte, al describir el proyecto “Lousã, Destino de Turismo Accesible” - que hizo la accesibilidad el centro para el progreso local y establecer estándares para el desarrollo de destinos turísticos accesibles vengo a mostrar cómo se puede lograr Turismo Accesible para Todos, mientras que promueve la colaboración y el desarrollo. Al hacerlo, también voy a mostrar cómo la provisión de accesibilidad puede mejorar el turismo y convertirse en una oportunidad de negocios en sí mismo - un mercado en constante crecimiento que va más allá del ámbito de la discapacidad. ABSTRACT Providing access solutions to all people in their tourism experience is the ultimate goal of any tourism service provider that takes an inclusive approach to his offer. To many this may seem utopian in that no “one” solution will be adequate to “all” for each person will always be an individual with special or specific needs regardless of his/her motor, sensory, intellectual, linguistic or social profile. In the knowing that Design for All is still what comes closest to finding solutions that will respond to the largest possible number of “users”, it is from there that any study in accessible

tourism must depart to find its way into what specifically makes tourism such an important area to promote equal rights and opportunities for all – the tourists and all the stakeholders that may be directly or indirectly involved in the tourist chain. In this article, the topic of “Accessible Tourism for All” will be addressed in two distinct manners. On the one hand, theoretical premises will be laid down – by making reference to legislation, norms, and academic and professional publications – in an effort to clarify concepts and terminology that still remains blurry to many. On the other hand, by describing the project “Lousã, Accessible Tourism Destination”– that made accessibility the hub for local progress and set standards for the development of accessible tourist destinations – I come to show how Accessible Tourism for All can be achieved, whilst promoting collaboration and development. In so doing, I will also show how the provision of accessibility may enhance tourism and become a business endeavour in itself – an ever growing market that goes well beyond the scope of disability. 1. Introduction This report is the final step of a learning process that took me through the Master in “Accesibilidad Universal y Diseño para Todos”. In this final piece of work – TFM (Trabajo de Fin de Master) – I bring together the academic knowledge that I gained with the practical background I have gained in the field. This comes to the fore, in the second part of this work, that reports on a project I was directly involved in, from 2009 until 2011. My participation in this project “Lousã, Destino de Turismo Acessível” (LDTA) [“Lousã, Accessible Tourism Destination”] took place within my professional activities as a tourist agency company “Accessible Portugal”. The services and work I provided were contributions as an expert in Accessible Tourism. It was my task to market Lousã as an accessible destination through my travel agency; to prepare and provide training to local staff; as well as to designing tourism products and packages in accordance with the specific needs and requirements of my clients and to the best of my knowledge and expertise. During the course of my activity in the project I also had the opportunity to contribute towards the development of academic studies carried out under the project in question. Through the project I here present (LDTA) I have the opportunity to take an academic approach to practical case, by going through a literature review and clarifying the theoretical and conceptual framework that is underlying. The objective of this particular piece of work is to start developing methodologies and tools for creating Accessible Tourism Destinations for All, with a constructive and pedagogical approach. I also justify the relevance of this work by addressing the fact that is timely and acute for as we work, the subject is being widely raised at worldwide, European, national and local levels. This is particularly true for countries such as Portugal and Spain, who see Tourism as a means to overcome the financial crises they are in, and that are looking into ways to draw in more tourists, while developing local resources. Clear examples of the way in which the subject is being dealt with at the highest levels are initiatives such as the UN Enable – Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in its article 30; all the actions now in place and led by the

United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO); and the every growing number of publications, namely the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism, adopted in 1999, by the General Assembly of the World Tourism Organization. It is interesting to read in its Article 7: Right to Tourism, that: The prospect of direct and personal access to the discovery and enjoyment of the planet’s resources constitutes a right equally open to all the world’s inhabitants; the increasingly extensive participation in national and international tourism should be regarded as one of the best possible expressions of the sustained growth of free time, and obstacles should not be placed in its way (…) Family, youth, student and senior tourism and tourism for people with disabilities, should be encouraged and facilitated. (UNWTO, 1999) It is also worth noting that this organization starts its inclusive approach in this document, updating it and strengthening its relevance through subsequent updates and recommendations on Accessible Tourism, issued by the General Assemblies of 2005 and 2013. At the American level, in 2010, the “Standards for Accessible Design - ADA “, were updated providing considerable improvements on the initial 1991 version. Those standards have had enormous implications on the tourism sector and on the quality of life of the local populations. Other examples can be seen at a European level. Among them we have the Spanish standard UNE-ISO 21542, dated 2012, concerning “Building construction, accessibility and usability of the built environment”; as well as UNE ISO 170001-1 – Critérios DALCO (Universal accessibility. Part 1: MGLC criteria to facilitate accessibility to the environment) the Law 51/2003, 2 December, (LIONDAU - Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades, No Discriminación y Accesibilidad Universal de las personas con discapacidad), and the Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2013, 29 November, that aproves the “Texto Refundido de la Ley General de derechos de las personas con discapacidad y de su inclusión social”. In Portugal, besides the adoption and ratification of the guidelines provided by the UN Convention in what concerns tourism, last May (2014), the Portuguese Standard NP 4523/2014 (Accessible Tourism, Hotels, Apartment Hotels and Inns) was published and is presently being put in place. The way towards implementing norms at a wide scale is a slow and difficult process. However, we consider these initial steps relevant and promising. To sum up, this work offers the opportunity to look upon practice with the distance that is required in an academic piece of work. It is more than a reflection on my practical experience of seven years in the field of tourism, in which the LDTA was crucial. It is the way forward towards further studies and practical developments in Accessible Tourism for All for this work allows me to dare and point out ways to build accessible tourist destinations for all, focused on customer satisfaction and its various specific requirements, thus bringing quality and excellence to the destinations.

2.

Conceptual framework

In order to address the subject of this report, and given the fact that it is to many a completely new domain, it appears useful to set the conceptual framework in which all may be placed. The matter under analysis is complex and requires insights from quite distinct areas. Special reference needs to be made to three of these which are the cornerstones of my research work. In the first place, my framework is to be found within Tourism Studies; secondly, in Disability Studies; and thirdly, my work draws upon professional norms that are to be found in legislation and in practice. In other words, my conceptual framework derives both from academic writings as well as from those documents and registers that regulate an action that is still in its early stages. All that is to be seen within this section will lead to a better understanding of the reasons why the Lousã Project is worth reflection and will provide the ground on which I have built my theoretical thinking on the matter. 2.1. The language we speak – clarifying concepts Throughout my work in the terrain, I have come to observe that terminology is still quite unstable and encompassing and, quite often, people use the same term for quite distinct notions, whilst the opposite also happens, different terms are used to refer to the same notions and concepts. It is not easy to clarify such concepts; however, it is useful to establish the boundaries that are to be understood for the benefit of our discussion. Tourism The first concept that requires clarification is that of Tourism, given that my whole Project is within this specific sphere. According to the document “Understanding Tourism: Basic Glossary” (UNWTO 2008: online), stemming from the United Nations approved 2008 International Recommendations on tourism statistics and Tourism Satellite Account, we take Tourism to be: […] a social, cultural and economic phenomenon which entails the movement of people to countries or places outside their usual environment for personal or business/professional purposes. These people are called visitors (which may be either tourists or excursionists; residents or non-residents) and tourism has to do with their activities, some of which imply tourism expenditure. Accessibility The overriding notion of “Accessibility” has gained different meanings in different contexts and has undergone change throughout time. Initially “access” was seen as the possibility of “arriving at”. This notion is usually connoted with roads connections and transport. This same concept was later to be had in relation to the web and technology at large. People gained access to information. A further development of the term came when “access” was related to “disability and impairment”. From then onwards, the term “accessibility” gained strong links with providing solutions for people with physical, sensory or intellectual impairment. This is

the notion that one will most frequently find in contexts such as special education, architectural compliances and more recently in cultural settings. There are also cases where access is related to financial capacity and in multicultural and multilingual contexts access can also be understood as “understanding” the other and the environments. All these concepts often intertwine and bleed into each other. And this is particularly the case when we address “Accessible Tourism for All”. Accessible Tourism for All In an effort to come to a term that is satisfactory and relevant to the approach that I have taken in all my action, and that is in consonance with the latest trends and has been advocated by the UNWTO, it is essential to come to the concept of “Accessible Tourism for All”. This appears to me as the most productive of all the terminology that has been used to address this issue. The UNWTO (2013) defines “Accessible Tourism for All” in the following manner: This is a form of tourism that involves a collaborative process among stakeholders that enables people with access requirements, including mobility, vision, hearing and cognitive dimensions of access, to function independently and with equity and dignity through the delivery of universally designed tourism products, services and environments. In so doing, important aspects that will be addressed below have been mentioned. It needs, however to be clarified that, within my work “Accessible Tourism for All” is to be seen as: Any form of tourism that by catering for the needs of people with disabilities will be catering for the needs of any tourist regardless of his or her personal or social bearings and specific requirements. 2.2. Knowing the “All”, their special needs and specific requirements Having clarified the core concepts to this work, it deems necessary to approach the other end of the matter: the people who will be addressed as having “specific needs or requirements” – in other words “all” in general and each and every one of us. It needs also to be seen that, here, as happened in the section above, terminology and concepts are still rather mixed and unclear. A matter that sometimes makes it difficult to find common ground for the discussion of an issue that goes well beyond disability (as it is still most commonly seen). In order to establish the framework from within we work, it is necessary to clarify what is understood by “disability” “special needs” “specific requirements”. Furthermore it is useful to determine – even if in a simplistic manner – the main needs and requirements that are seen as basic to the major disability groups that are usually taken into account in matters of accessibility. Special needs The notion of “People with Special Needs” came into common use in Europe in the 1990s. This terminology was used in order to be more inclusive than saying: "people with disabilities”,

since people who need better access conditions also includes pregnant women, children, older people and people carrying heavy luggage, among others. This was seen, at the time, as a better term but in many cases (and even today) it is used simply as an alternative to "People with disabilities" (without the intended wider connotations). However, many people with disabilities felt that this term was wrong, as it implies that some people’s needs are “special”, and the term is stuck in the medical model of disability. They argued that they just have ordinary needs like everyone else but their needs must be catered for in different ways. This nomenclature corresponds to the Social-Environmental model of disability that is presently taken as the relevant model by which disability needs to be addressed. It is curious to notice however that both the European Commission and the UN, do not use the term “People with Special Needs”. This in itself is a sign that the terminology in use is not consensual and other terms need also to be equated. Specific requirement Specific requirements, in this context, is a term used to indicate all the people who have ANY, SPECIFIC ACCESS REQUIREMENT, which usually might not be catered for in typical mainstream services or venues. It indicates there are some people who may not be “disabled” in an official sense, but who need e.g. handrails to support them up steps, good lighting, high contrast colours, safety features, large print menus, and so on… Whether people consider themselves disabled or not is another issue. Many people do not, especially older people who gradually come to depend more on environmental supports. They may have many of the same specific access requirements as people with permanent disabilities. Acquired disability, as opposed to lifelong disability, is also an issue which affects the self-perception of persons with disabilities. What it comes down to in the end is that a whole range of people have more or less pronounced or specific requirements for an accessible environment and accessible services, and this is why following Design for All principles and methods is the best approach to providing access for all. Disability Traditionally, disability has been considered a medical or biological condition attributed to a particular individual, a dysfunction that needed to be fixed by treatment or rehabilitation. According to this approach it is the person with disability that needs to be changed or altered. Nowadays, the social aspects of disability are taken into consideration. The question may be raised of how societies create obstacles for persons with disabilities and how these barriers can be eliminated. The removal of societal barriers – whether they are architectural, legal, organizational or simple prejudice and hostility will contribute towards easing the life of those with a disability, thus mitigating the impact that it might have on people’s lives. In so being, disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

Understanding disability as an interaction means that disability is a social construct, not an attribute of the person. Furthermore, the proportional increase of the ageing population is starting to blur the clear distinction between persons with or without disabilities. Person with a disability The term “person with a disability” has come to substitute the term "disabled person" and is used in reference to any person whose full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others is hindered by the barriers in the environment they are in and by attitudinal barriers. In the context of tourism, these are to be felt in the most varied contexts during travel, accommodation and other tourism services. Disability is thus not just a health problem. It is a complex phenomenon, reflecting the interaction between features of a person’s body and features of the society in which he or she lives. Others who may be included in this group, due to problems in accessing tourism products and services, are people with temporary disabilities: people using crutches for a temporary period, the elderly, somebody carrying luggage, small children or people who are big or small in size or stature, etc. The major disability groups that are usually taken into account in matters of accessibility can be divided and grouped into the following major groups: (1) People with permanent disabilities (Physical or motor, sensory and intellectual or cognitive impairment); (2) Other groups with temporary disability/impairments (people who have undergone surgery or have had an accident; pregnant women and children, among others); (3) Seniors and elderly. Each of these conditions will require specific conditions if full access is to be provided, and each person may require a solution which is quite unique to his/her personal situation. For instance: somebody with poor mobility may require a lift, whilst somebody else may simply need a hand rail; A blind person may be perfectly autonomous if he/she is accompanied by a guide dog, whilst somebody else may require tactile floor guides to move in a given space. A pregnant woman may simply require seating, or a retreat where to rest. Somebody with a broken toe, may require all the access solutions that should be in place for somebody with severe physical impairment. This comes to prove, that rather than defining the type of disability/impairment as such, it seems relevant to find accessibility solutions that, for their universal design, will suit a wide range of people with an equally diverse range of needs. In so doing, the disability, again, is no longer the problem; the means to gain autonomy is the main issue at stake. Seniors and elderly It is not easy to define what is a “senior”, or an elderly person, because the aging process is different from person to person, from family to family, and the socio cultural factors also have a large influence. Europe is facing demographic changes with an increasing ageing population, in parallel to the “baby-boomer” generation in North America. The baby-boomers, who are now becoming 60 years of age, are used to travelling and don’t expect to give it up due to old age. They demand high quality tourism products and high levels of service. Many of them have good incomes and

more free time than the average adult, and they are free to travel outside the high season. However, they are still more likely to experience barriers when travelling due to age-related impairments and long-term health conditions. To be competitive in the future, the tourism industry must be able to meet the changes and demands from domestic and inbound/foreign markets. Destinations and businesses must reshape their offers to attract and accommodate an ageing market which, to some degree, has different preferences and requirements to those of younger tourists and previous generations of older tourists. Good accessibility is a key requisite for sustainable and inclusive tourism, whatever the age of the visitors. So, targeting Seniors, it is an absolute “must”. With all in mind and in an effort to respond to the needs and requirements of such heterogeneous realities, solutions within the currents of “Universal Design and Design for All” have come into being. It is clear that in the effort to find offers that are adequate for all and universally acceptable; there is the risk of not providing an adequate solution for each individual’s specific case. This means that Access will always need to be looked in an individual manner because each person is special in his/her particular way. Functional diversity is so varied that Universal Design or Design for All can only try to offer solutions that will cater for the needs of the greatest number possible. This might be utopian, but, at this stage it is definitely the way forward. On this note, the UNWTO “Recommendations on Accessible Tourism” (2013:4) state that: It [Universal Design] promotes a shift towards user-centered design by following a holistic approach and aiming to accommodate the needs of people with disabilities, regardless of any changes they might experience in the course of their lives. Consequently, Universal Design is a concept that extends beyond the issues of mere accessibility of buildings for people with disabilities and should become an integrated part of policies and planning in all aspects of society. It is in this tone that one is to approach Accessible Tourism for All.

2.3.

Accessible Tourism for All – the holistic/systemic approach

In order to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, special attention must be given to the physical environment, transportation, information and communications, including computer systems and information and communications technology, and other services and facilities open to the public or for public use, in urban areas as well as rural and coastal zones. As happens with any type of tourism offer, Accessible Tourism for All must take a holistic approach and consider every step of the way from home to destination, there and then back. The full tourist chain must be covered, so that no link is left untouched. A broken link – for lack of access may mean an unsuccessful trip. A minor glitch, may jeopardize everything else, however excellent it may be.

The tourism chain as presented by ADDAC (2003:21), sees the full chain as covering the full tourist circuit, involving: • Tourism destination management; • Tourism information and advertising (Preparation, information and booking); • Urban and architectural environments; • Modes of transport and stations; • Accommodation, food service and conventions; • Cultural activities (museums, theatres, cinemas, and other); • Other tourism activities and events; This holistic approach is paramount in the context of Accessible Tourism for All. Accessibility must be present throughout the tourism chain, the links between all sites, services and activities must be well planned and tested.

2.4.

An accessible destination – “Tourism for All”

If we are to consider the offer of “Accessible Tourist Destinations for All”, Tourism destination management bodies and administrations should set out an accessible-tourism strategy that lays out a set of principles and reasons explaining why accessibility in tourism is necessary so as to make it possible to evaluate services and identify changes that may be needed. The UNWTO (2013) clearly states that: The concept of an accessible tourism destination of a locality, region or district must have the necessary accessible facilities, infrastructure and transport in order to create an environment that is varied, stimulating and easily accessible. Efforts shall be made to avoid promoting as being accessible those tourist attractions or accommodations in an inaccessible area without transport opportunities or connections with other tourist venues. Most forms of tourism are bound by the tourists’ motivations. Thus we have sun & beach, adventure, cultural, and other tourism “types”, that tend to offer tourists packages that please their interests and motivations. Unlike other forms of tourism dictated by the tourist motivations, Accessible Tourism for All involves the provision of integrated responses and solutions to tourists regardless of the type of package in place. In other words ANY and ALL tourism packages and types can and ought to be accessible to all. Furthermore, such a concern – that of developing an accessible tourism destination – transcends the individual operational capabilities of the players of the tourism sector. The provision of Accessible Tourism for All cannot be disconnected from a territorial dimension, because only within the context of a given destination can these integrated

responses and solutions be fully attended and achieved. This makes us underline the fact that an accessible tourism destination has to work from within, in a collective effort that involves the locals in an effort to welcome the tourist, whilst improving standards for their own people. It is important to stress the definition and development of the provision of Accessible Tourism for All in the context of the closer relationships that tend to be established between the providers of tourism services in a destination. It is in this context that answers to the challenges of accessibility that go beyond the scope of action of the tourism service providers should be found. For example, the accessibility to spaces, public facilities and services, attractions and animations - often of great importance for the attractiveness of tourist destination - are often under the responsibility of the local authorities. Safety, health care and civil protection - so important to convey a sense of security to these tourists - are also deeds that clearly exceed the scope of tourism service providers. This means it is important to look into the territory’s involvement in creating the conditions and making an integrated range of accessible tourist services available to all.

2.5 “we mean business” – Managing an “Accessible Tourism Destination According to the WHO (2007), in 2020, there will be 1.2 million people over the age of 60, with a special emphasis in the incoming markets. This is due to the promotion of equal opportunities in the access to the workplace and other integration policies that has led to a significant increase of people with low mobility with economic means to travel. What is this market of the tourists with specific access requirements? Is this a homogeneous or rather a heterogeneous market? How to identify and reach the complex web of special conditions, affinities and motivations of these markets? Is it possible - and if so - is it actually feasible to meet the needs of all of them and all at once? Several studies (EU forthcoming – presented on 6 June 2014, in European Commission DG Enter – Tourism Policy Unit) confirm that the market of Accessible Tourism for All is vast and set it as a unique business opportunity often underrated by the industry. According to available data (UN Enable, 2012) show that 10% to 15% of the global population has some type of disability, which translates the existence of at least 600 million to 850 million people with special needs worldwide. As of 2011, there were 138.6 million people with access needs in the EU, of which 35.9% were people with disabilities aged 15-64, and 64.1% were the elderly population aged 65 or above. Among the 27 EU countries, UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain are countries with the largest population of people with access needs, all above 10 million. In 2012, people with access needs in the EU took approximately 783 million trips within the EU, and the demand is anticipated to grow to about 862 million trips per year by 2020, equivalent to an average growth rate of 1.2% annually. Also in 2012 more than half of the individuals with disabilities in the EU travelled; a slightly smaller proportion of the elderly people travelled during the same period, according the very recent (2013-2014) study carried

out by EU Commission (“Economic Impact and Travel Patterns of Accessible Tourism in Europe”). Another important issue is related to travel companions. On average, people with access needs in the EU travel with about 1.9 companions; people with disabilities tend to travel with more companions than the elderly population (2.2 and 1.6, respectively). The economic contribution of Accessible Tourism will be amplified by a similar scale if the travel companion effect is taken into account. Again, these studies show that many people with disabilities in developed countries would be travelling more if the accessible conditions were being really met by the providers of tourist services. These studies also show that an important part of tourists with disabilities who actually travel are loyal to their holiday destination and in such numbers that tend to be greater than among regular tourists. Recent information gathered about the Economic impact of accessible tourism, presented in the “Economic Impact and Travel Patterns of Accessible Tourism in Europe” - European Commission - DG Enterprise and Industry - presentation of the key study findings by University of Surrey, ProAsolutions, Neumann Consult, GFK, (2014) tell us that the direct gross turnover of EU’s Accessible Tourism for All in 2012 was about €352 billion; after taking the multiplier effect into account, the total gross turnover contribution amounted to about €786 billion. The direct gross value added of EU’s Accessible Tourism for All in 2012 was about €150 billion; after taking the multiplier effect into account, the total gross value added contribution amounted to about €356 billion. The direct employment its contribution in 2012 was about 4.2 million persons; after taking the multiplier effect into account, the total employment generated was about 8.7 million persons. I conclude from these accounts that Accessible Tourism for All is advantageous from an economic standpoint for those tourism destinations that are really willing to take up the accessibility challenge. Given the challenges posed by the multiplicity of conditions covered in the market, it will be rather difficult for any tourism destination to fulfil all the specific requirements of the tourists. This assumption leads us to make a finding: there is not a typical market of Accessible Tourism for All, which means each tourism destination has to do its own market study in order to identify its potential offer and typify its fringes of demand. For the success of any accessible tourism destination, goes far beyond addressing the physical context (accessibility of tourist amenities; public spaces; sports, leisure and culture equipment; attractions or frames of visit...) and is mainly to be addressed as the creation of a business culture in favor of accessibility and the inclusion of all visitors. The special attention and dedication of all stakeholders involved in the tourism business is of great importance to sustain the full integration of tourists in the destination, regardless of their physical, sensorial or psychological condition. The local population is a major stakeholder of Accessible Tourism for All. Therefore, it’s important to ensure that residents are truly committed in making their community and territory accessible to tourists, and in so doing, they will be contributing to

their population at large. Finally, destination management organizations and local authorities are natural leaders and prominent stakeholders in this business approach, sensitizing, motivating and promoting a collective call for a progressive empowerment of the whole community in the matters of the accessibility.

3. The “Lousã, Accessible Tourism Destination” project

The opportunity to have been directly involved in a pioneering Accessible Tourism Destination project in Portugal – the “Lousã, Destino de Turismo Acessível” (LDTA) [“Lousã, Accessible Tourism Destination”] played an important role in the development of my critical thinking on the topic of Accessible Tourism for All. Despite the fact that was a local endeavor, which might be regarded as small scale at a European level, it proved to be an important test tube for major concerns. In this section, I will proceed with a detailed account of the main aspects that were dealt with in the course of the 3 years (2009 a 2011) that the project lasted. The Lousã village is located in central Portugal, about 20 km from Coimbra, a mountain region where the main tourist products are based on nature, but also in their cultural resources. From the social development point of view, Lousã has a long tradition in the field of accessibility and inclusion for people with disabilities, represented by ARCIL: Association for the Recovery of the Lousã Inadaptated Citizens, founded in 1978. The work of this association has been fundamental in building a culture of accessibility, changing attitudes and instituting respect for difference, while it has been expanding its sphere of action. In 2004, they created the Municipal Ombudsman for Persons with Disabilities by the City Council of Lousã, whose role calls for the improvement of quality of life of disabled people, sensitizing local actors and trying to give voice to the people who live and work in the county. One of the most visible initiatives was the attribution of the “Lousã Accessible Seal”, which identifies the public and private establishments that meet the minimum accessibility requirements. Another major initiative in the growing of this project was the completion of the first National Conference on Accessible Tourism in Lousã held in April 2007, a result of the joint effort of the several entities, as: the Municipal Ombudsman for Persons with Disabilities Lousã, the School of Education of Coimbra (ESEC), the Association for the Recovery of the Lousã Inadaptated Citizens (ARCIL), the National Institute for Rehabilitation (INR, IP), and others. The project "Lousã, Accessible Tourism Destination" was thus the culmination of a process of development, which is now accepted as a strategic commitment of the Municipality of Lousã. To operate and formalize the project, it was formed a “Task Group”, coordinated by a technical team which integrates different local actors of tourism and social area and also has the support of national and international experts. Led by the “Task Group”, the implementation of an action plan has required the coordination of local actors. This reinforces the idea of the

need for a systemic view and approach, where the joint work of different actors is the lever of the qualification strategy and differentiation of this target. Thus, this process is the result of the convergence of social, cultural and political enablers of building a culture of accessibility, which extends beyond the sphere of tourism. The defined Action Plan involves different levels of intervention in the territory that was supported by EU funding. In this plan are contemplated the operations of accessibility in the tourism dimension (lodging, catering, similar initiatives, animation), in social services (health, safety and human support, technical aids) and territory (intervention in major hubs of touristic attraction, accessibility of public facilities and developing new responses of adapted transport). Important in this process, was also the involvement and support of relevant government agencies: Tourism of Portugal, Deputy State Department of Rehabilitation, Tourism Region of Central Portugal and the National Institute of Rehabilitation.

The approach and the plan The initial working team evolved to a task force that was first called "Accessible Lousã". Following the action of ARCIL and the Municipal Ombudsman, soon other local institutions joined in and thus the local movement grew with: • The membership of some important tourist representatives of the Municipality: the local Hotel “Palácio da Lousã”, some bed & breakfast establishments and restaurants and a tourism service agent; • The participation of the authorities for the regional economy (Direcção Regional da Economia do Centro), for the regional development (Comissão de Coordenação da Região Centro) and the Regional Tourist Board (Região de Turismo do Centro); • The collaboration of academics from the High School of Education of Coimbra (Escola Superior de Educação de Coimbra); • Meaningfully, the municipal authority of Lousã (Câmara Municipal da Lousã) also joined the task force, thus recognizing the importance of the project and embracing the local move of citizens; • The coordination of this team was done by Essentia Consulting, which had the task to prepare the referred above plan: "Plan for the Development of Accessible Tourism in the Municipality of Lousã". The Plan identified the conditions, the needs and the requirements of a common strategy for the creation and development of the accessible tourism destination. In the proposed Action Plan the individual roles of the participants in the task force were established. A governance model was also set up for the management of the Plan, giving to local players such roles as managing and execution of tasks and offering to external participants such roles as the consulting, advising and monitoring. In the end, the Plan set out the basis for the launching of the project "Lousã, Accessible Tourism Destination".

The public reactions to the Plan coming from the participants of the task force and from the local community were extremely positive and gratifying. The initiative exceeded the initial expectations and gained a broader institutional support, both locally and externally. This unexpected impulse generated the best expectations for the pursuit of the strategy and the goals that were set on the Plan.

The stakeholders This Project was only possible thanks to the enthusiastic dedication of the stakeholders involved. Special mention needs to be made to the following partners: i. ii. iii.

iv. v.

Local Tourist Agents; Local Rehabilitation Agents; External Agents, namely Regional Tourism Board, Commission for Coordination & Regional Development, High School of Education of Coimbra – ESEC, “Accessible Portugal” - Tour Operator, Turismo com Essentia - Consultants Official National Organisations International Partners, namely ENAT - European Network for Accessible Tourism, ONCE Foundation (Spain), Municipal Authority of Ávila (Spain), Accessible Animation Agent HANIMA (France), TGB Accessibility Consulting (Belgium).

The population at large became involved in different phases and aspects of the Project. This would come to be an important driving force for all involved in that the Project gain popular ownership and called for collective local pride, a strong motor for the involvement of the whole community. Under the aegis of the European Network for Accessible Tourism (ENAT), the Task Group developed a system of permanent monitoring and evaluation of the project "Lousã, Accessible Tourism Destination" aiming for its continuous improvement. The implementation of this system allowed the production of qualitative information that assisted to the decision making and the introduction of corrective measures This work included an assessment of the project that aimed to set the Lousã's experience as an international benchmark for the creation and development of accessible tourism destinations. Furthermore, the multi-facetted evaluation of the project contributed to the creation of the first Accessible Tourism Destination Certification Programme (ATDCP) which was applied in Lousã in the final phase of the implementation period. It was based on an extensive audit of the municipality's accessible tourism policies (including resourcing), infrastructure, transport, services and visitor information, and includes accessibility assessments of the outdoor environment, overnight accommodation, attractions, activities and offers for visitors including, especially, persons with disabilities, older persons and families with small children. It is a completely new destination management tool which provides an accurate measure of the excellence of an accessible tourism destination, based on strictly defined criteria. The Destination Certification Programme involves assessment meetings with destination managers,

coupled with on-site audits and document analysis by external auditors, thus building a picture of the accessible destination. Also a set of tourist packages were prepared with experimental, training, demonstrative and promotional purposes. The purpose intended to stimulate the social and commercial integration of Lousã in the national and international markets of Accessible Tourism for All. In turn, the tourist packages created the opportunity for local tourism stakeholders to acknowledge the weaknesses along with the strengths of Lousã's tourist offer concerning the specific requirements of all tourists. The Tour Operator "Accessible Portugal"(AP), that I was managing at that time, provided consulting services to the Task Group in the area of tourism operation for special tourists. AP took charge of the organisation and the delivery of the tourist packages of Tourism for All. The involvement of AP had also coaching purposes: it was a very good opportunity to test, as realistically as possible, an array of tourist proposals specially arranged to serve different types of tourists with specific access requirements. This coaching was a major asset not only for the tourist agents involved in the delivery of tourist products but also for all of us, engaged on the project, namely the technical team of the project which has been directly involved in the preparation, organisation, implementation and evaluation of these "tours" and “fam trips”.

In implementing these "Tour" simulations, all the participants in the Task Group had the opportunity to measure the specific requirements of groups, of different tourists, as well as its commercial potential. On the other hand, the details in execution of tours raised critical points in the organisation and provision of special tourist packages that would be improved through the continual training effort of the local tourism stakeholders. Moreover, the simulations served to identify simultaneously those local tourist agents who demonstrated a willingness to be more devoted and prepared to provide such special services. With the expertise and connections of AP, the simulations were carried out with real tourists organised in groups in real situations of Accessible Tourism for All. The contact with the specific requirements of these groups of tourists - according to their diverse conditions or functional diversity, their expectations and their affiliations (e.g. travelling with family or friends that then also become part of the group of tourists) - was an important source of knowledge and motivation for the awareness of local tourist agents who voluntarily involved themselves in these tests of Accessible Tourism for All.

The afterlife In conclusion, Lousã has undertaken a pioneer work in the conception and in the testing on the field of innovative solutions to the challenges posed by the creation and development of accessible tourism destinations. This is a collective effort that must be continued with persistence, far-sightedness and wisdom because the wide community of tourism professionals and citizens with specific access requirements have great expectations on the continuous improvement of the accessibility for all at Lousã.

4.

Concluding remarks

Coming to the end of this report, I can only look back on my experience as an MA student and that of the many years I have worked in accessible tourism to conclude that an academic approach to a practical project allows for the critical analyses of what had up until then been a professional experience with a high degree of personal involvement. Time and distance gives perspective, and critical thinking allows for the pinpointing of issues that might have gone unnoticed while in the terrain. Furthermore, the tools that were provided in the course of the various study units provided the tools and the framework for what I now address as a thorough piece of research work. I now see it as a privilege to be able to merge my professional and academic knowledge towards summarizing my learning outcomes in the form of concluding remarks. One of my firmest convictions, as I come to the end of my reflection is that there are numerous advantages in empowering territories and consequently tourist destinations to welcome ALL visitors, as “guests”, offering them solutions that are adequate to their age, their preferences, their physical, sensory and intellectual conditions, as well as their social and financial conditions (in the 21st century in Europe, one might think of a new kind of impairment, that is the financial in nature). The decision to promote “Accessible Tourism for All” is crucial for the development of sustainable practices, based on solid social and economic pillars, whilst also guaranteeing

environmental sustainability. The long-term vigour of the touristic supply, – and that of the companies involved, depends upon the current and prospective consumer population and their specific requirements and abilities. This openness to All, as well as being vital for the sustainability of Tourism is also a question of social justice and guarantees access to goods and services, a principle to be followed by most democratic states, throughout the world. In addition to incrementing the tourist turnover, by simultaneous providing greater quality of life for residents in the territories, Accessibility for All and design processes, products and services guarantees a positive and enriching dynamic that is bound to have very positive repercussions in the territory and its people in the long run. Although total access for all is still looked upon as utopian, it may become a reality through thoughtful guidance, tested methodologies, scientific and empirical studies. These factors will contribute in significant ways towards continuous improvement and the inherent cross-sector progress of all those involved in the process. Regarding the case of Tourism, and that of Accessible Tourism for All, the specific topic to be dealt with in this work, I would like to reinforce three main issues that I believe to be the core principles of progress and success in the domain: 1) Strategic commitment on the part of public and private decision makers, 2) Training and 3) the Certification of Destinations. These I see as highly relevant issues that are crucial to the improvement of accessibility and, consequently, to the development of excellence and distinction in Tourism destinations. In the first place, only the commitment of the decision makers will guarantee the mainstreaming of Accessible Tourism for All, by encouraging service providers to invest in accessibility and by making them aware of the economic and social benefits at stake. Still within this issue, I consider the harmonization of standards and legislation to be crucial, for there is an urgent need to provide better guidance and clear information to all users. This means a strong on-going support from politicians, administrators and decision makers in business, including education and training, actions that I will detail bellow. Needless to be said, all this needs to be based on the necessary financial support. It needs also to be added that this development needs to be coordinated and to have continuity, particularly through public and private partnerships at local and regional levels. I also seems appropriate to consider the need for a dedicated work unit or a coordinator within the management structure of National Tourism Organizations. At this stage, I would also like to highlight the vital collaboration between both of the sides involved in the tourism activity: customers and providers. Only by encouraging fundamental networking and knowledge transfer will strategic planning be possible, for these two elements, who appear to be on different sides, will, in practice, be partners contributing towards the improvement of the services to be offered. Only by knowing and understanding the tourist, will the tourism provider know what to offer. And only by truly understanding their needs, will it be possible to find solutions that will be appealing and truly relevant to each individual and, in so being, to all. In the strategic planning for the development of the tourism regions, it is important to be aware of the diversity of access needs and the patterns of travel behaviour across different groups and countries, as well as across individuals within groups, to target them in the most appropriate way. The touristic offer in terms of infrastructure, services and

possibilities has to improve accessibility gradually, considering the long-term planning and investments. In the second place, it is important to address the issue of training. I truly believe that regular training of staff and management is needed to provide a solid knowledge base on which to build accessibility services. Management has to understand the crucial importance for their business and it competitiveness and has to invest in the training of all the staff, regardless of the role that they play in the tourism chain. Staff in tourist venues plays an important role in reducing potential insufficiencies in access or in mitigating unforeseen difficulties. Training in disability awareness and customer care can minimize the barriers encountered by persons with disabilities or other kind or impairment, in that one of the greatest barriers is still that of attitudes. A good attitude and the required skills to deal with diversity will go a very long way, even where and when the physical environment is not completely barrier-free. The staff of tourism establishments and related services should be prepared to know, understand and address the needs and specific requirements of customers with disabilities, seniors and others clients with some kind of impairment. Should there be no other reason to support this belief, one could turn to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 2006, that reinforces that staff should receive appropriate training regarding disabled persons’ rights, so as to provide better assistance and services guaranteed by those rights, to monitor and provide the necessary services and explain the operation of facilities designed for customers with disabilities. This said, access is basically a right, that out to be respected and guaranteed. The final point I would like to make concerns Certification. I see the benefits of Certification of Tourist Destinations if it is to be understood as a pedagogical tool that leads to a systemic and interdependent work with the various agents. Certification have also to be understood as a trusted process of sustained growth of the Touristic destination, transparent and communicable to stakeholders so that they can evaluate the state of the art of the destination, deciding on its adequacy and security. I still consider another fundamental aspect of Certification to be connected to the virtual online market where the sale and purchase of tourism products are made. Certification provides credibility and is a means to highlight the quality and reliability of the products and services that are sold or purchased. This is a matter that is all the more relevant when the destination is unknown or when the specific needs of the tourist are to be met and full access is to be guaranteed. These three elements are, to my view, relevant matters in the professional context of tourism, but equally so when one is to address research. I believe further work needs to be done in many domains of the Accessible Tourism for All and there is much to be better understood in terms of the territories, the players and the products of each link of the tourism chain. However, the three points that I have highlighted are transversal to the whole chain and are the cornerstones of a collaborative and sustainable approach. It is in the hands of the educational system – and so much so in that of postgraduate research – to contribute towards a better knowledge of the issues at stake and the training of a new generation of tourism agents. In so saying, I am advocating the development of postgraduate studies in Accessible Tourism for All that is appealing to anybody in the sector, regardless of their academic or

professional background, and that will in the long run contribute towards a wider offer of high quality tourist products. I conclude by reinforcing that Accessible Tourism for All is directly related to the quality and the competitiveness of tourism destinations and, consequently, will have a significant impact, particularly in countries where this industry is relevant in economic terms. Tourism is a huge sector in Portugal and in Spain, and in Europe at large, and should Accessible Tourism for All be taken seriously, it could become a vital component of a modern, ever-growing sustainable tourism.

5. References ADAC. 2003. Barrierfreier Tourismus für Alle. Eine Planungshilfe für Tourismus-Praktiker zur erfolgreichen Entwicklinung barrierefreier Angebote. München: ADAC. Buhalis, D. & S. Darcy (eds). 2010. Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Buhalis, D., S. Darcy, & I. Ambrose (eds). 2012. Best Practice in Accessible Tourism. Inclusion, Disability, Ageing Population and Tourism. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Câmara Municipal da Lousã. 2011. “Lousã, Destino de Turismo Acessível – Relatório Final do Projecto”. http://www.cm-lousa.pt/_uploads/1.pdf (accessed 30 July 2014). Cavinato, J. L. & M.L. Cuckovich. 1992. “Transportation and Tourism for the Disabled: An Assessment”. Transportation Journal, 31 (3). Devile, E. 2003. Necessidades de informação turística para pessoas com mobilidade reduzida: o caso dos deficientes físicos. Tese de mestrado. Aveiro: Universidade de Aveiro. Devile, E. 2009. “O desenvolvimento do Turismo Acessível: dos argumentos sociais aos argumentos de mercado”. Journal of Tourism and Development 11, 39-46. Devile, E. & E. Kastenholz. 2009. “O desenvolvimento de destinos turísticos acessíveis para pessoas com mobilidade reduzida como reforço da sua competitividade”. Book of Proceedings International Conference Advances on Tourism Economics. Lisbon: Universidade Lusíada de Lisboa. Devile, E., F. Jesus, A. Cruz. 2011. “O Desenvolvimento do Turismo acessível na Lousã: perspetivas dos agentes locais do setor do turismo”. Book of Proceedings Vol. I – International Conference on Tourism & Management Studies. Algarve: Universidade do Algarve. Devile, E., A. Garcia, F. Carvalho & J. Neves. 2012. Turismo Acessível em Portugal - Estudo de casos de boas práticas. Journal of Tourism and Development. 17/18 (3), 1403-1416. Fontes A., I. Ambrose & M. Broeders. 2012. "Defining and Developing an Accessible Tourism Destination. Lessons from Lousã, Portugal”. Newsletter Design For All Institute of India, Vol. 8 August 2012. UNWTO. 1999. Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. http://ethics.unwto.org/en/content/globalcode-ethics-tourism (accessed 7 September 2014).

Gunn, C. 1972. Vacationscape: Designing Tourist Regions. Austin: University of Texas. Leidner, R. (2006). Design for all in the economy: The example of tourism accessible for all in Europe. Newsletter Design For All Institute of India, Vol. 1 May 2006, No.4. http://www.rollingrains.com/archives/Tourism_for_all_in_Europe_Leidner_2006.pdf (Accessed 6 September 2014). Leiper, N. 1979. “The Framework of Tourism - Towards a definition of Tourism, Tourist, and the Tourism Industry”. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (4), pp. 390-407. Ley 51/2003, 2 de diciembre, LIONDAU - Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades, No Discriminación y Accesibilidad Universal de las personas con discapacidad. Boletín Oficial Español. Morgon B.& S. Polack. 2014. The Economic Costs of Exclusion and Gains of Inclusion of People with Disabilities - Evidence from Low and Middle Income Countries. CBM. Norma Portuguesa NP 4523/2014, (Accessible Tourism, Hotels, Apartment Hotels and Inns). IPQ. Prates, J. & A. Garcia. 2009. “Turismo Acessível em Portugal – O Caso do Turismo para Pessoas com Mobilidade Reduzida”. Revista de Turismo & Desenvolvimento 11, 171-179 Hausemer, P., I. Ambrose, K. Ito, M. Auzinger. 2014. “Mapping skills and training needs to improve accessibility in tourism services”. 2014. Twenty Case Studies. EU Study http://www.accessibletourism.org/?i=enat.en.reports.1620 (accessed 11 September 2014) Raleigh, N. 1997. Principles of Universal Design. http://www.ncsu.edu/project/designprojects/udi/center-for-universal-design/the-principles-of-universal-design/ (accessed 9 September 2014). Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2013, de 29 de noviembre, “Texto Refundido de la Ley General de derechos de las personas con discapacidad y de su inclusión social”. Boletin Oficial Español. Smith, R. 1987. “Leisure of Disabled Tourists: Barriers to Participation”. Annals of Tourism Research, 14 (3), 376-389. UN General Assembly. 2006. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 13 December, A/RES/61/106, Annex I, http://www.refworld.org/docid/4680cd212.html (accessed 8 September 2014). UNE ISO 21542. 2012 (12/12/2012) “Building construction, accessibility and usability of the built environment”. AENOR. UNE ISO 170001-1. 2007 (27/12/2007) Accesibilidad universal. Parte 1: Criterios DALCO para facilitar la accesibilidad al entorno. AENOR. University of Surrey, ProAsolutions, Neumann Consult, GFK. 2014. Presentation of the key study findings “Economic Impact and Travel Patterns of Accessible Tourism in Europe”. http://www.accessibletourism.org/?i=enat.en.presentations.1578 (accessed 30 July 2014). UNWTO. 2008. Understanding Tourism: Basic Glossary. http://media.unwto.org/en/content/understanding-tourism-basic-glossary (accessed 6 September 2014).

UNWTO. 2005. Recommendations on Accessible Tourism for All. Resolution A/RES/492 (XVI) / 10, 16th Session of the General Assembly of the World Tourism Organization, November 28 - December 2, Senegal. UNWTO. 2013. Updating of the Recommendations on Accessible Tourism for All of 2005. Resolution A/RES/637(XX) of August 2013. Recommendations developed with the support of the ONCE Foundation for Social and Economic Inclusion of People with Disabilities (Spain) and the European Network for Accessible Tourism (ENAT).