Article: French versus Canadian Tourism: Response to the Disabled

This article provides further contributions to cultural understandings of disability and accessible tourism coming from France and Canada. The study used a qualitative approach of in-depth interviewing and drew the sample from predominantly people with disability   and agency directors. The French sample comprised 23 people with disability and 2 agency directors, whereas the Canadian sample included 20 people with disability and 4 agency directors. The findings examined the commonalities and contrasts between the barriers experienced, which were divided into physical, financial, attitudinal and communication. Recommendations are provided to improve the accessibility of both the French and Canadian responses to the group.

Freeman, I., & Selmi, N. (2010). French versus Canadian Tourism: Response to the Disabled. Journal of Travel Research, 49(4), 471-485. doi: 10.1177/0047287509349268

http://jtr.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/content/49/4/471.abstract

Abstract Copyright © 2012 by SAGE Publications

"Both France and Canada rank as highly developed tourist destinations. This study compares the underexplored area of the needs of tourists who are disabled in France (n = 25) and Canada (n = 24). The authors examine Canada’s and France’s accommodation to both domestic and international tourists who have disabilities, giving the study a unique perspective in comparing and contrasting results to the same questions across similar populations in two countries. The results indicate that neither country’s tourism industry has developed an effective policy to accommodate tourists who have disabilities indicated by significant barriers existing that exclude segments of the disabled population. This article takes the words of those with disabilities to recommend steps necessary to improve the tourism opportunities with this population".

Given previous inclusions on the blog with respect to the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games, it would be interesting to research whether the initiatives introduced by the Vancouver Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (VANOC) have had a lasting legacy on accessible tourism. A series of physical infrastructure, disability awareness training, information, promotion and marketing strategies were implemented to improve the accessibility of the games experience for athletes, spectators, volunteers and employees alike. Photo 1 shows some of the accessible facility infrastructure built for the Vancouver Games. Disability awareness training was part of the volunteer training that was discussed by the volunteers as part of a research project investigating the volunteer management practices of Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games (Dickson, Edwards and Darcy, 2010).

Photo 1: Accessible Ski Facilities

Source: VANOC 2010 - A Barrier Free Experience Presentation

References

Coward, D. & Konstantinidis, L. (2010) Vancouver 2010 Paralympic Winter games - a barrier free experience. VANOC, Vancouver.


Dickson, T., Edwards, D., Darcy, S., Benson, A., & Blackman, D. (2010, Feb 19). Olympic and Paralympic Legacies: the 2010 Volunteers’ Story. Paper presented at the Third International Sport Business Symposium - Economics and Management of the Olympic Games, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Freeman, I., & Selmi, N. (2010). French versus Canadian Tourism: Response to the Disabled. Journal of Travel Research, 49(4), 471-485. doi: 10.1177/0047287509349268

Research is only good if it brings about improved access and accessible experiences - Lessons from Dunedin, New Zealand

This blog is dedicated to showcasing research evidence for accessible tourism. However, the overall aim is for the research to inform industry and government to improve accessible tourism experiences for people with disabilities. To this end we must all seek to influence the tourism policy agenda through presenting research based evidence and advocating for changes to practice where there has been a noted deficiency from the perspective of people with disabilities, suppliers or government regulators/coordinators.


I am currently at a research conference in Dunedin in New Zealand where any travel experience for a power wheelchair using quadriplegic with high support needs has its travel trip chain logistics that need to be organised before the rigours of an academic conference can be considered. Information planning, accommodation, air transport, ground transport, equipment hire, attendant services and medical supplies are just some of the considerations with organising an accessible trip. Luckily I had an insider's perspective at the destination to assist me with my travel planning through the University of Otago's Donna-Rose McKay who is the Manager of Disability Information & Support who was able to suggest a good quality accessible accommodation at the University of Otago - Executive Business Apartments. Further, Donna-Rose suggested I contact John Marrable, InformationConsultant at the Dunedin DisabilityInformation Service who provided contacts for hiring a patient lifter. The trip was finally confirmed once a direct flight from Sydney was negotiated with the only carrier providing direct service, my wife Fiona and my attendant Matt were ready to go.


Dunedin is located on the Otago Peninsula which is known for its ecotourism, historic architectural, cultural heritage and local cafe/bar experiences. Dunedin has much to offer the tourist looking for accessible experiences but finding travel planning information was not easy. Yet, local authorities are keen to improve on current practice and I met with the local disability information service, interested Dunedin Council representatives and local media. The following story - Benefits Seen in Accessible Tourism - appeared in the Otago Daily Times on 7 December 2011


http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/189720/benefits-seen-accessible-tourism


What became evident was that while the urban town centre offered a good range of accessible opportunities for residents and tourists alike, the same could not be said for day trip operators in the region. Quite simply, outside of the excellent Taieri Gorge Railway we could not locate a single day tour operator who could provide wheelchair access to any of the standard tours offered to other tourists. This is an extraordinary situation in a country that prides itself on its clean green image but obviously not one that is socially inclusive or sustainable. Accessible coaches and minibuses are not costly accessible tourism infrastructure and the Dunedin city bus fleet boasts an excellent fleet of low floor accessible buses. So what is the problem with the local tour operators? 

Photo 1: Simon Darcy boarding with the historic Taieri Gorge Railway carriage © Fiona Darcy 2011.

This situation has a significant cost disincentive for tourists with disabilities and seniors with access needs. For example, the magnificent Royal Albatross Colony at Taiaroa Head is a must see experience that has just made the Lonely Planet's 1000 Ultimate Sights, a standard tour to the colony with cost $95 per person. However, without access provision, the only option was to hire a Dunedin Taxi wheelchair accessible vehicle that cost $240 for the three-hour hire plus the $40 for the Royal Albatross Centre's Albatross Classic tour.


Do the figures - that is a $185 cost imposition on tourists with disabilities to have the same quality of experience as other tourists!


The other thing that tourists with disabilities miss out on by taking the "segregated" tourist experience is they don't get to mix socially with all the other tourists. This is something that all other tourists take for granted but is often lost where integrated day tour operations are not available. This in itself can significantly reduce the overall experience of the destination.


Sadly, this lack of accessibility to day trip operations is not isolated to New Zealand but is just as prevalent in Australia where "charter operations" have been excluded from the Disability Discrimination Act and the subsequent Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport. This situation is currently being tested in the Federal Court of Australia where Julia Haraksin - a person with a disability - has challenged this exclusionary practice and hopefully this situation in Australia will be remedied in the near future. However, New Zealand does not have similar disability discrimination legislation and relies on the New Zealand Disability Strategy, which lacks opportunities for New Zealanders with disabilities to challenge discriminatory practices. 


While all this may seem daunting and overly critical, those of us who want to see improvements in accessible tourism experiences know the benefits of tourism are as important for people with disabilities as to the rest of the population. 

Photo 2: Simon Darcy enjoying time out from every day life, a spectacular view and a soaring Northern Royal Albatross some of the intangible social psychological benefits of tourism for all people © Fiona Darcy 2011.

Dunedin and the Otago Peninsula have much to offer people with disabilities and seniors with access needs, which could be made far more accessible through some basic improvements in information provision. However, a much broader commitment to the principles of accessible tourism and the desire of local tourism operators to provide accessible experiences for people with mobility, hearing, vision, intellectual, mental health and other disabilities is required. Given the increasing numbers of people with disabilities and seniors with access needs destinations need to make provisions in order to provide a competitive advantage in an increasingly competitive international tourism market (see Buhalis & Darcy 2011 and Buhalis, Darcy and Ambrose 2012).


References

1. Buhalis, D., & Darcy, S. (Eds.). (2011). Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues. Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.
2. Buhalis, D., Darcy, S., & Ambrose, I. (Eds.). (2012). Best Practice in Accessible Tourism: Inclusion, Disability, Ageing Population and Tourism. Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.
3. Gibb, J. (2011, 7 December). Benefits seen in accessible tourism, Otago Daily Times. Retrieved from http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/189720/benefits-seen-accessible-tourism

National Tourism Dialogue and Communiqué on Accessible Tourism

The National Information Communication Awareness Network for the arts, sport, recreation and tourism (a.k.a. NICAN) recently held a National Tourism Dialogue that brought together stakeholders with an interest in the area disability, access and inclusive or accessible tourism http://www.nican.com.au/news/communique-national-tourism-dialogue

The Dialogue was opened by Sen Jan McLucas the current Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers where she issued a media release http://www.janmclucas.fahcsia.gov.au/mediareleases/2011/Pages/increase_access_tourism_20062011.aspx and the text of her opening speech http://www.janmclucas.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=87:nican-national-dialogue-on-tourism&catid=4:speeches&Itemid=17

The day adopted a participatory action research approach (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003; Goodley & Lawthom, 2005; Kitchin, 2000; Taylor, 1999) and a background paper on Setting a Research Agenda for Accessible Tourism (Darcy, 2006) was circulated as a starting point for the participants. Research can be a foundation for policy development and change particularly where industry groups demand a business case. Historically disability, access and accessible tourism have been challenged by industry groups as they do not believe that people with disability are a market segment or believe that they are a low yield group or that provision for accessible accommodation does not provide a reasonable return on investment (Australian Hotels Association & Tourism and Transport Forum, 2010). To counter these arguments, two presentations were incorporated within the agenda to provide a research base  from nationally collected government statistics,  and to challenge market myths and stereotypes (Dwyer & Darcy, 2011; Forrester, 2011). The afternoon was then devoted to a stakeholder brainstorming session aimed at coming to a group consensus for a call to action to action to improve the tourism opportunities for the group through leveraging industry engagement. Photo 1 is the group present at Parliament house with a number of other speakers joining by teleconference - Sheila King, Access for All Alliance Inc.,  Associate Prof Simon Darcy, UTS Business School.

Photo 1 - National Tourism Dialogue Group Photo plus others who joined by teleconference.

The agenda for the day was:

National Dialogue

Stakeholders in Disability Tourism 

Monday 20 June 2011

9:30am – 3:00pm

Parliament House, Canberra 

AGENDA

9:30     Welcome and introductions (Patron Annette Ellis)

a.     Apologies

b.     Brief introductions (all)

c.      Scene setting and purpose of forum (CEO NICAN Suzanne Bain-Doniohue/Marketing Manager NICAN Craig Wallace)

10:00  Formal opening and keynote

     Current directions in disability & the importance of access tourism

                Senator the Hon. Jan McLucas, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers

Morning tea [Group photograph]



10:30  The Case for Accessible Tourism

a.     The value of disability tourism - what the research tells us?

(Ass. Professor Simon Darcy, UTS Business School - University of Technology, Sydney)

 (Bill Forrester, Travability)

b.     Other sources and gaps in our knowledge (all)

12:30 Lunch

1:30    Taking action (brainstorm of all stakeholders)

a.     What do we want to happen?

b.     Who do we need onside to make it happen?

c.      What could we do to make it happen?

d.     What are the barriers to getting there? 

2:30     Next steps

a.     Possible joint communiqué (draft with papers)

b.     Recap key outcomes & agreements (Annette Ellis)

3:30     Close

For inquiries please contact Craig Wallace at Nican on (02) 6241 1220 / 0451 199 750

The communiqué from the National Dialogue is now reproduced for your convenience and can be accessed from http://www.nican.com.au/news/communique-national-tourism-dialogue

National Dialogue

Stakeholders in accessible and inclusive tourism 

Wednesday 22 June 2011

Parliament House, Canberra 

COMMUNIQUÉ

Inclusive and Accessible Tourism – an opportunity for Australia

A National Dialogue of key stakeholders in inclusive and accessible tourism was opened on Monday 20 June by Senator the Hon Jan McLucas, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers at Parliament House, Canberra.  The Dialogue, hosted by Nican and chaired by Annette Ellis, National Patron and former Shadow Minister for Disability and Carers, has agreed on a call to action for the tourism industry, government and the Australian community:

Tourism by people who have a disability or who are ageing is an opportunity for Australian Tourism to seize the competitive advantage in a tight market. It is also a great way to demonstrate corporate social responsibility.  The time is right for action as Australia’s baby boomers retire.

Key stakeholders including researchers, tourism operators and referral providers have joined forces, with the support of the Australian Government, to build awareness about the opportunities and to address barriers to tourism by these groups. 

Together, we believe that there is a growing understanding of the potential of the tourism market for people with disability, including seniors, which goes hand-in-hand with boosting visitor numbers and strengthening our place as a top draw tourism destination for people around the world. 

We recognise that access to leisure and recreation, including taking a holiday, is an important part of living an ordinary life and helps realise the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with a Disability and the National Disability Strategy. 

Ultimately, this will help to build a more welcoming and inclusive society, where individuals and families with a disability have choices and no longer feel shut out.

There are significant advantages to developing better tourism products, services and experiences to people with disability as well as information about opportunities, venues and services. 

This is good business sense and is also consistent with rights, access and corporate social responsibility. 

With the right planning this can be a real win for both people with disability and the tourism industry. 

Now is the time to promote the business case for disability tourism where:   

·        Some 88 per cent of people with disability take a holiday each year which accounts for some 8.2 million overnight trips.

·        The average travel group size for people with disability is 2.8 people for a domestic overnight trip and 3.4 for a day trip.

·        There is a myth that the inclusive tourism market does not spend because of economic circumstance.

·        People with disability travel on a level comparable with the general population for domestic overnight and day trips.

·        The total tourism expenditure attributable to people with disability is $8bn per year or 11 per cent of overall tourism expenditure (Dwyer & Darcy, 2011).

The business case is clear and draws on landmark research from Associate Professor Simon Darcy, with the University of Technology’s Business School, who presented at the session. 

We welcome the Government's commitment in the area of travel and tourism through the National Disability Strategy as well as work on Access to Premises and Transport Standards, access to airlines and cinema access. 

More could be done including an inclusive/accessible tourism category within a mainstream tourism award; a marketing strategy; a practical information guide; a National Forum with Tourism operators and further work to refresh and promote the business case for inclusive and accessible tourism, especially with industry.

We commend these ideas to government and each of us is committed to moving from commitment to action.

We are excited by the opportunity to deepen the understanding of the importance and potential of inclusive and accessible tourism for all Australians.  We will continue to work together and promote the benefits across the tourism industry, agencies of governments at all levels, tourism promoters, and the Australian community.

Issued by:

Australia For All Alliance Inc

Greatvenue

Disabled Motorists Association

Disability Information and Resource Centre

Nican

IDEAS

Travability

Leadership plus (formerly Inclusive Leisure Vic) 

Media contact: Craig Wallace, Marketing Manager, Nican – 0451 199 750

References  

Australian Hotels Association, & Tourism and Transport Forum. (2010). Accessible Rooms In Short Term Accommodation: A Look At Supply and Demand. Canberra: Australian Hotels Association and AZthe Tourism and Transport Forum.

Darcy, S. (2006). Setting a Research Agenda for Accessible Tourism (pp. 48).  Retrieved from http://www.sustainabletourismonline.com/137/universal-access/setting-a-research-agenda-for-accessible-tourism

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). Strategies of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dwyer, L., & Darcy, S. (2011). Chapter 14 - Economic Contribution of Tourists with Disabilities: An Australian Approach and Methodology. In D. Buhalis & S. Darcy (Eds.), Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues (pp. 213-239). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Forrester, B. (2011). What’s happening overseas - Learning’s from the SATH Conference Paper presented at the National Tourism Dialogue, Parliament House, Canberra. http://www.nican.com.au/news/communique-national-tourism-dialogue

Goodley, D., & Lawthom, R. (2005). Epistemological journeys in participatory action research: alliances between community psychology and disability studies. Disability & Society, 20(2), 135-151.

Kitchin, R. (2000). The Researched Opinions on Research: disabled people and disability research. Disability & Society, 15(1), 25-47.

Taylor, G. (1999). Empowerment, identity and participatory research: Using social action research to challenge isolation for Deaf and hard of hearing people from minority ethnic communities. Disability & Society, 14(3), 369-384.

  

World Report on Disability - The Travel Chain

The World Health Organization (2011) has produced an extensive research report on disability, which reviews evidence about the situation of people with disabilities around the world. It draws together the most recent sources to present a comprehensive overview of the major areas that affect the lives of people with disability. The report consists of 10 chapters including:

• Introduction
• Understanding Disability
• Disability - the global picture
• Genera health care
• Rehabilitation
• Assistance and support
• Enabling environments
• Education
• Work and Employment
• Recommendations

Interestingly, addresses many of the key concepts discussed in the blog including constraints and barriers to participation, universal design and market dynamics but the report does not mention tourism specifically. It does, however, draw attention to United Nations’ (2006) Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities and how the articles relate to the importance of participation in all areas of citizenship. While it could be argued that the key chapters discussed in the report cumulatively provide a guide for developing accessible destinations, there is no doubt that the overriding priority of the report in ensuring that all people with disability have accessible environments, services and attitudes in their place of residence. Of course, once this has been completed for local residents, then the same local areas become accessible to tourists with disability visiting the areas.

With regard to travel, the report discusses the concept of the "travel chain" that is defined as

The “travel chain” refers to all elements that make up a journey, from starting point to destination – including the pedestrian access, the vehicles, and the transfer points. If any link is inaccessible, the entire trip becomes difficult (81). Many mass transit providers, particularly in developing countries, have implemented accessibility only partially, for example by providing a limited number of accessible vehicles on each route, making improvements only to the main stations, and providing access only on new lines. Without accessibility throughout the travel chain, the job is incomplete. Inaccessible links require taking an indirect route, creating the barrier of longer travel times. The goal must be for people to have access to all vehicles and the full service area, as well as the pedestrian environment (82). But progressive realization may be the most practical short-term response (WHO 2011, p.179).

Photo 1: Blog Author Simon Darcy boarding low floor accessible bus that forms an important part of the "travel chain" since their introduction in many countries since the late 1990s (© Fiona Darcy 2000)

Photo 1 shows a low floor accessible bus that is one part of a "travel chain" that also needs to be supported by for example accessible timetables, continuous pathways, tactile ground surface indicators and disability awareness trained bus drivers to name a few. In recognising the inherent pragmatism required to ensure the travel chain, this report together with the World Health Organization (2007) Global Age Friendly Cities, provides an impetus for nations and city states to meaningfully address the disability and ageing issues through creating sustainable approaches to these issues as part of addressing disability citizenship across all areas of social participation. The World Health Organization documents can be used to provide a foundation for providing a global understanding within local contexts and to draw the attention of those who are resisting the addressing of these issues. The document concludes by asking three questions that need to be addressed in a policy context: What do we know about people with disabilities?; What are the disabling barriers? And. How are the lives of people with disabilities affected?. In conclusion, the report makes nine recommendations:

·        enable access to all mainstream policies, systems and services;

·        invest in specific programs and services for people with disabilities;

·        adopt a National disability strategy and plan of action;

·        involve people with disabilities;

·        improved human resource capacity;

·        provide adequate funding and improve affordability;

·        increased public awareness and understanding of disability;

·        improve disability data collection; and

·        strengthen and support research on disability.

Interestingly in my own first major report, Anxiety to Access (Darcy, 1998), these recommendations are not dissimilar and provide a sound blueprint for improving travel and tourism industry approaches to disability, access and accessible tourism.

References  

Darcy, S. (1998). Anxiety to access: tourism patterns and experiences of New South Wales people with a physical disability (pp. 76). Sydney: Tourism New South Wales. http://corporate.tourism.nsw.gov.au/Anxiety_to_Access_p783.aspx

United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New York http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/convtexte.htm: United Nations General Assembly A/61/611 - 6 December 2006.

World Health Organization. (2007). Global Age-friendly Cities Guide from http://www.who.int/ageing/age_friendly_cities/en/index.html

World Health Organization, & World Bank. (2011). World Report on Disability, from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report/en/index.html

  

Embodiment in the disabling built-environment: an experience of daily life in Thailand

In another excellent contribution by a recently completed Ph.D. and Architecture Lecturer, Antika Sawadsri (2010) (Photo 1), we are provided with a compelling examination of the embodied challenges of a disabling built environment on a person's daily life in Thailand. In drawing on the rich body of knowledge from the geographies of disability (see Gleeson, 1999), the thesis creates a compelling understanding of social rather than medicalised approaches to understanding disabling environments and the impact upon an individual's citizenship. An abstract of an article is provided with permission from the author.

Photo 1: The researcher - Antika Sawadsri

Abstract

The approach to the inaccessibility of the built environment for disabled people in academic research has been heavily focused on legislating for access requirements and providing technical solutions. The spatial experiences of disabled people tend to be disregarded or taken as a peripheral form of knowledge. This article draws on an in-depth study of the lived experience of one wheelchair-using volunteer. It reveals that the majority of the physical and psychological difficulties encountered by disabled people are the result of inaccessible environments rather than their impairment. There is a need to understand the built environments of disabled people by regarding different forms of negotiating with a disabling environment, acquiring capital, the social agency of disabled people as well as attitudes towards them and discriminatory constructions.

Keywords: Spatial experience, disabling environment, lived experience, disabled people, agency for change

One of the strengths of the research was an understanding of how Turn, the individual the thesis is based on, negotiates accessibility to challenge the disabling nature of their local environments. One such example, was where upon discussing the access challenges that the Turn was facing, the local neighbours collaboratively got together to remove parts of the disabling streetscape to provide a continuous pathway. Photo 1 is an example from the thesis of Turn's ongoing process of negotiation that is indicative of people with disability's continual negotiation of accessibility on a daily basis.

Photo 2 The place where the street hump in Tum's village was removed on her behalf by neighbours

I am conscious that a great deal of the research and literature on accessible tourism is only from the English-speaking world and I implore readers of this blog to encourage researchers from non-English-speaking countries to submit English language abstracts so that we can promote their research and get a better cross-cultural understanding of the embodied nature of disabling environments. Congratulations Antika!

Readers can contact Antika on antika@gmail.com

Lecturer, School of Architecture

King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Thailand

References

Gleeson, B. (1999). Geographies of Disability. London: Routledge.

Sawadsri, A. (2010). Accessibility and Disability in the Built Environment: negotiating the public realm in Thailand. Doctor of Philosophy, Newcastle University, Newcastle.  

Attitudes within accessible tourism research - tourism, customer service and hospitality

As outlined in the blog entry on leisure constraint theory, Smith’s (1987) the seminal work identified attitudinal barriers as a central constraint to accessible tourism. Darcy and Buhalis (2011) extend constraints through an understanding of social model approaches to disability, where 'hostile social attitudes’ are identified together with the disabling environments as foundation considerations for understanding the lived experience of people with disability. A great deal of research has been undertaken in the area of behaviour and attitudes towards disability across many industry sectors (Antonak & Livneh, 2000; Finkelstein, 1980). The importance of attitudes within accessible tourism is central to a customer service orientated industry (Buhalis & Darcy, 2011).

This is certainly borne out in the hotel accommodation sector, where Darcy (2010) identifies that across all disability groups a 'can-do customer service attitude’ is valued as part of the top five considerations for staying at a particular hotel. Within interviews for this research, it was suggested that while some hotel accommodation may not provide the level of access that a person requires, if the customer service attitude is right then adjustments to rooms are possible to make them workable for the individuals involved. As Darcy’s research suggests, good environmental design shown in Photo 1 needs to be reinforced through staff training about inclusive practices for people with disability to create a welcoming and hospitable service environment.

Photo 1: Height adjusted table provided for workshop participants - hotel staff provided a range of adjustments to ensure the smooth running of a disability related workshop at a major Sydney hotel  - Participants and research team from left to right: Peter Simpson, Greg Killeen, Bruce Cameron, Simon Darcy, George Laszuk, Glenn Bennett  & Emma Wong (© Fiona Darcy 2007)

Yet, as Groschl’s (2007) study concluded that in a review of human resource polices and practices in Canadian hotels identified no best human resource management practices regarding disability. Groschl further suggested that manager perceptions of people with disability were coloured by an industry discourse of aesthetics and self-presentation that adversely affected people with disability's chances of employment. This reinforced previous research that suggested that tourism marketing managers 'camouflaged' their true attitudes towards people with disability to provide a politically correct organisational response (G. A. Ross, 1994). This type of discrimination was further reinforced by a study on the ethics of treatment of people with disability by students studying tourism and hospitality (G. F. Ross, 2004).

The importance of a well structured measures to assess attitude toward and the delivery of disability awareness training across industry sectors is well established (Antonak & Livneh, 2000; Chan, Livneh, Pruett, Wang, & Zheng, 2009; Finkelstein, 1980). Daruwalla & Darcy (2005) study of tourism and hospitality students, and employees of a tourism marketing organisation examined the affect of disability awareness training on personal and societal attitudes towards disability. Their study suggested that personal attitudes were much harder to change than societal attitudes. Further, there is a greater impact to training when the intervention involves people with disability that could be considered the peer of those being trained. However, the effect of the training dissipates with time unless reinforced through workplace practices.

A new contribution to this area is the work of the Bizjak, Knezevic, & Cvetreznik (2011) titled Attitude change towards guests with disabilities: Reflections From Tourism Students. The paper identifies that no tourism based curriculum within Slovenia includes modules on people with disabilities as tourists. The method they employed involved designing an experiment to test whether attitudes towards disabilities could be changed through education interventions. They used a semantic differential scale to measure the changes in student attitude towards people with disability through a short education program and sessions about people with disability.

Abstract: (restricted to 10% of abstract due to copyright)…In our experiment, it was shown that the process of changing perception of tourism students towards people with disabilities was relatively simple…a range of topics on the disabled have the potential to improve attitudes of students towards people with disabilities as tourists.

Keywords: people with disabilities, tourism education, semantic differential, attitude change. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

References

Antonak, R. F., & Livneh, H. (2000). Measurement of attitudes towards persons with disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 22(5), 211-224.

Bizjak, B., Knezevic, M., & Cvetreznik, S. (2011). Attitude change towards guests with disabilities: Reflections From Tourism Students. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(3), 842-857. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2010.11.017

Buhalis, D., & Darcy, S. (Eds.). (2011). Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues. Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Chan, F., Livneh, H., Pruett, S. R., Wang, C. C., & Zheng, L. X. (2009). Societal attitudes toward disability: Concepts, measurements, and interventions. In F. Chan, H. Livneh, S. R. Pruett, C.-C. Wang & L. X. Zheng (Eds.), Understanding psychosocial adjustment to chronic illness and disability: A handbook for evidence-based practitioners in rehabilitation. (pp. 333-367). New York, NY.: Springer Publishing Co.

Darcy, S. (2010). Inherent complexity: Disability, accessible tourism and accommodation information preferences. Tourism Management, 31(6), 816-826.

Darcy, S., & Buhalis, D. (2011). Chapter 2 - Conceptualising Disability: Medical, Social, WHO ICF, Dimensions and Levels of Support Needs. In D. Buhalis & S. Darcy (Eds.), Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues (pp. 21-44). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Daruwalla, P. S., & Darcy, S. (2005). Personal and Societal Attitudes to Disability. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3), 549-570.

Finkelstein, V. (1980). Attitudes and disabled people: Issues for discussion: International Exchange of Information in Rehabilitation.

Gröschl, S. (2007). An exploration of HR policies and practices affecting the integration of persons with disabilities in the hotel industry in major Canadian tourism destinations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 26(3), 666-686. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2006.05.007

Ross, G. A. (1994). Attitudes Towards The Disabled In Destination Marketing Organizations (Marketing Organizations).  Ph.D. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.  

Ross, G. F. (2004). Ethics, trust and expectations regarding the treatment of disabled staff within a tourism/hospitality industry context International Journal of Hospitality Management 23(5), 523-544.

Smith, R. (1987). Leisure of disabled tourists: barriers to participation. Annals of Tourism Research, 14(3), 376-389.