Codes of Conduct in Tourism

Abstract

Recent years have seen a rising tide of codes of conduct for use in the tourist industry. These have been produced by a variety of organisations having different roles in the industry, and are aimed at the tourists themselves, operators within the industry, host governments and host communities. The core of this paper is a discussion, with examples, of codes aimed at, respectively, the tourist, the industry and the hosts. A number of issues raised by the analysis are discussed. Specifically, these issues are the monitoring and evaluation of codes of conduct (or lack of these), the use of codes as a form of marketing, the regulation or voluntary self‐regulation of the use of codes and the variability between codes and the resulting need for coordination. On all of these issues the need for future research is clear.

From Spectrum to Multiverse: A New Perspective on the Diversity of Quality Control Tools for Sustainable Tourism Theory and Practice

“…Some QCTs are designed for businesses with specific operating characteristics (Black and Crabtree 2007; Font and Buckley 2001; Honey 2002; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Nicholls and Kang 2012; Park and Millar 2016; Sasidaharan, Sirakaya, and Kerstetter 2002). Costa Rica’s Certification for Sustainable Tourism, for example, is specific to Costa Rican accommodations (DestiNet 2014), while Green Globe certification is global (Parsons and Grant 2007); LEED certification is designed for any USA-based business (Millar and Baloglu 2011), the Sustainable Slopes program targets North American ski resorts (Needham and Little 2013; Smerecnik and Andersen 2011), and the Hotel Investment Conference Asia Pacific Sustainable Hotel award is Asia-Pacific specific (Weaver et al 2013).…”

“…Early QCT literature, largely conceptual, explanatory, and evaluative, highlights the inherent complexities of the “nuts and bolts” or mechanics of QCT programmatic design, which include standard methodologies (i.e., process-based, performance-based, and hybrid, teleological vs. deontological codes), assessment methods (on-site vs. remote), membership structures (e.g., one-time or continuous application and/or enrollment [fees]), rating systems (i.e., criteria and point gradations), methods of recognition of superior sustainable tourism practice (i.e., hierarchal, pass/fail, or membership), resource accounting methodologies (i.e., type 1, 2, 3 emissions, indirect/induced impacts); and sustainability management methods (hardware-centric [operational management] vs. software-centric [organizational management]) (Black and Crabtree 2007; Blangy and Epler Wood 1993; Buckley 2002; Bien 2006; De Grosbois and Fennell 2011; ECOTRANS 2012; Dief and Font 2012; Font 2001; Graci and Dodds 2015; Honey 2002, 2007; Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Synergy 2000; Toth 2002, 2006).…”

“…QCTs vary by how they primarily advance sustainability progress (Lesar, Weaver, and Gardiner 2016). Awards are prestige-conferring mechanisms highlighting sustainability achievements to the market (Font and Buckley 2001; Font and Tribe 2001; Weaver 2006; Weaver et al 2013), while capacity-building for sustainability is facilitated through codes of conduct and education (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006). Management systems and variations (e.g., EMS) assist sustainability management (Chan 2008; Dief and Font 2012; Diamantis and Westlake 1997; Mensah 2014; Tinsley 2001), while performance indicators measure sustainability progress and permit monitoring (Ayuso 2007; Black and Crabtree 2007; Toth 2006).…”

“…In contrast, policies exemplify flexible QCTs that can be opportunistically adopted or modified at business discretion, lack a prescribed adherence framework, and do not require independent verification of conformance (Weaver 2006). Codes of conduct are a semistructured QCT; businesses commit to implementing a specified array of code directives, but users are not usually subject to independent verification (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006).…”

From Spectrum to Multiverse: A New Perspective on the Diversity of Quality Control Tools for Sustainable Tourism Theory and Practice

“…Some QCTs are designed for businesses with specific operating characteristics (Black and Crabtree 2007; Font and Buckley 2001; Honey 2002; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Nicholls and Kang 2012; Park and Millar 2016; Sasidaharan, Sirakaya, and Kerstetter 2002). Costa Rica’s Certification for Sustainable Tourism, for example, is specific to Costa Rican accommodations (DestiNet 2014), while Green Globe certification is global (Parsons and Grant 2007); LEED certification is designed for any USA-based business (Millar and Baloglu 2011), the Sustainable Slopes program targets North American ski resorts (Needham and Little 2013; Smerecnik and Andersen 2011), and the Hotel Investment Conference Asia Pacific Sustainable Hotel award is Asia-Pacific specific (Weaver et al 2013).…”

“…Early QCT literature, largely conceptual, explanatory, and evaluative, highlights the inherent complexities of the “nuts and bolts” or mechanics of QCT programmatic design, which include standard methodologies (i.e., process-based, performance-based, and hybrid, teleological vs. deontological codes), assessment methods (on-site vs. remote), membership structures (e.g., one-time or continuous application and/or enrollment [fees]), rating systems (i.e., criteria and point gradations), methods of recognition of superior sustainable tourism practice (i.e., hierarchal, pass/fail, or membership), resource accounting methodologies (i.e., type 1, 2, 3 emissions, indirect/induced impacts); and sustainability management methods (hardware-centric [operational management] vs. software-centric [organizational management]) (Black and Crabtree 2007; Blangy and Epler Wood 1993; Buckley 2002; Bien 2006; De Grosbois and Fennell 2011; ECOTRANS 2012; Dief and Font 2012; Font 2001; Graci and Dodds 2015; Honey 2002, 2007; Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Synergy 2000; Toth 2002, 2006).…”

“…QCTs vary by how they primarily advance sustainability progress (Lesar, Weaver, and Gardiner 2016). Awards are prestige-conferring mechanisms highlighting sustainability achievements to the market (Font and Buckley 2001; Font and Tribe 2001; Weaver 2006; Weaver et al 2013), while capacity-building for sustainability is facilitated through codes of conduct and education (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006). Management systems and variations (e.g., EMS) assist sustainability management (Chan 2008; Dief and Font 2012; Diamantis and Westlake 1997; Mensah 2014; Tinsley 2001), while performance indicators measure sustainability progress and permit monitoring (Ayuso 2007; Black and Crabtree 2007; Toth 2006).…”

“…In contrast, policies exemplify flexible QCTs that can be opportunistically adopted or modified at business discretion, lack a prescribed adherence framework, and do not require independent verification of conformance (Weaver 2006). Codes of conduct are a semistructured QCT; businesses commit to implementing a specified array of code directives, but users are not usually subject to independent verification (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006).…”

Visitors’ Perceptions of Tourism Impacts

“…The implication for demand-side management of tourism impacts is that, in addition to the environmental impact messages found in destinations’ advertising and promotional material, island managers could consider integrating appropriate information about the economic and sociocultural impacts of tourism that islands are experiencing. For example, it could be that these specific desired changes could be captured in visitor Codes of Conduct , which are commonly used in environmentally sensitive areas (Garrod and Fyall 1998; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Moore, Smith, and Newsome 2003; Moscardo 1996). By gaining a greater understanding of tourism development-related change, visitors could be motivated and empowered to reflect on and adjust their own impact-inducing behaviors.…”

From Spectrum to Multiverse: A New Perspective on the Diversity of Quality Control Tools for Sustainable Tourism Theory and Practice

“…Some QCTs are designed for businesses with specific operating characteristics (Black and Crabtree 2007; Font and Buckley 2001; Honey 2002; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Nicholls and Kang 2012; Park and Millar 2016; Sasidaharan, Sirakaya, and Kerstetter 2002). Costa Rica’s Certification for Sustainable Tourism, for example, is specific to Costa Rican accommodations (DestiNet 2014), while Green Globe certification is global (Parsons and Grant 2007); LEED certification is designed for any USA-based business (Millar and Baloglu 2011), the Sustainable Slopes program targets North American ski resorts (Needham and Little 2013; Smerecnik and Andersen 2011), and the Hotel Investment Conference Asia Pacific Sustainable Hotel award is Asia-Pacific specific (Weaver et al 2013).…”

“…Early QCT literature, largely conceptual, explanatory, and evaluative, highlights the inherent complexities of the “nuts and bolts” or mechanics of QCT programmatic design, which include standard methodologies (i.e., process-based, performance-based, and hybrid, teleological vs. deontological codes), assessment methods (on-site vs. remote), membership structures (e.g., one-time or continuous application and/or enrollment [fees]), rating systems (i.e., criteria and point gradations), methods of recognition of superior sustainable tourism practice (i.e., hierarchal, pass/fail, or membership), resource accounting methodologies (i.e., type 1, 2, 3 emissions, indirect/induced impacts); and sustainability management methods (hardware-centric [operational management] vs. software-centric [organizational management]) (Black and Crabtree 2007; Blangy and Epler Wood 1993; Buckley 2002; Bien 2006; De Grosbois and Fennell 2011; ECOTRANS 2012; Dief and Font 2012; Font 2001; Graci and Dodds 2015; Honey 2002, 2007; Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Synergy 2000; Toth 2002, 2006).…”

“…QCTs vary by how they primarily advance sustainability progress (Lesar, Weaver, and Gardiner 2016). Awards are prestige-conferring mechanisms highlighting sustainability achievements to the market (Font and Buckley 2001; Font and Tribe 2001; Weaver 2006; Weaver et al 2013), while capacity-building for sustainability is facilitated through codes of conduct and education (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006). Management systems and variations (e.g., EMS) assist sustainability management (Chan 2008; Dief and Font 2012; Diamantis and Westlake 1997; Mensah 2014; Tinsley 2001), while performance indicators measure sustainability progress and permit monitoring (Ayuso 2007; Black and Crabtree 2007; Toth 2006).…”

“…In contrast, policies exemplify flexible QCTs that can be opportunistically adopted or modified at business discretion, lack a prescribed adherence framework, and do not require independent verification of conformance (Weaver 2006). Codes of conduct are a semistructured QCT; businesses commit to implementing a specified array of code directives, but users are not usually subject to independent verification (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006).…”

Visitors’ Perceptions of Tourism Impacts

“…The implication for demand-side management of tourism impacts is that, in addition to the environmental impact messages found in destinations’ advertising and promotional material, island managers could consider integrating appropriate information about the economic and sociocultural impacts of tourism that islands are experiencing. For example, it could be that these specific desired changes could be captured in visitor Codes of Conduct , which are commonly used in environmentally sensitive areas (Garrod and Fyall 1998; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Moore, Smith, and Newsome 2003; Moscardo 1996). By gaining a greater understanding of tourism development-related change, visitors could be motivated and empowered to reflect on and adjust their own impact-inducing behaviors.…”

From Spectrum to Multiverse: A New Perspective on the Diversity of Quality Control Tools for Sustainable Tourism Theory and Practice

“…Some QCTs are designed for businesses with specific operating characteristics (Black and Crabtree 2007; Font and Buckley 2001; Honey 2002; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Nicholls and Kang 2012; Park and Millar 2016; Sasidaharan, Sirakaya, and Kerstetter 2002). Costa Rica’s Certification for Sustainable Tourism, for example, is specific to Costa Rican accommodations (DestiNet 2014), while Green Globe certification is global (Parsons and Grant 2007); LEED certification is designed for any USA-based business (Millar and Baloglu 2011), the Sustainable Slopes program targets North American ski resorts (Needham and Little 2013; Smerecnik and Andersen 2011), and the Hotel Investment Conference Asia Pacific Sustainable Hotel award is Asia-Pacific specific (Weaver et al 2013).…”

“…Early QCT literature, largely conceptual, explanatory, and evaluative, highlights the inherent complexities of the “nuts and bolts” or mechanics of QCT programmatic design, which include standard methodologies (i.e., process-based, performance-based, and hybrid, teleological vs. deontological codes), assessment methods (on-site vs. remote), membership structures (e.g., one-time or continuous application and/or enrollment [fees]), rating systems (i.e., criteria and point gradations), methods of recognition of superior sustainable tourism practice (i.e., hierarchal, pass/fail, or membership), resource accounting methodologies (i.e., type 1, 2, 3 emissions, indirect/induced impacts); and sustainability management methods (hardware-centric [operational management] vs. software-centric [organizational management]) (Black and Crabtree 2007; Blangy and Epler Wood 1993; Buckley 2002; Bien 2006; De Grosbois and Fennell 2011; ECOTRANS 2012; Dief and Font 2012; Font 2001; Graci and Dodds 2015; Honey 2002, 2007; Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Synergy 2000; Toth 2002, 2006).…”

“…QCTs vary by how they primarily advance sustainability progress (Lesar, Weaver, and Gardiner 2016). Awards are prestige-conferring mechanisms highlighting sustainability achievements to the market (Font and Buckley 2001; Font and Tribe 2001; Weaver 2006; Weaver et al 2013), while capacity-building for sustainability is facilitated through codes of conduct and education (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006). Management systems and variations (e.g., EMS) assist sustainability management (Chan 2008; Dief and Font 2012; Diamantis and Westlake 1997; Mensah 2014; Tinsley 2001), while performance indicators measure sustainability progress and permit monitoring (Ayuso 2007; Black and Crabtree 2007; Toth 2006).…”

“…In contrast, policies exemplify flexible QCTs that can be opportunistically adopted or modified at business discretion, lack a prescribed adherence framework, and do not require independent verification of conformance (Weaver 2006). Codes of conduct are a semistructured QCT; businesses commit to implementing a specified array of code directives, but users are not usually subject to independent verification (Mason 2007; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Weaver 2006).…”

Visitors’ Perceptions of Tourism Impacts

“…The implication for demand-side management of tourism impacts is that, in addition to the environmental impact messages found in destinations’ advertising and promotional material, island managers could consider integrating appropriate information about the economic and sociocultural impacts of tourism that islands are experiencing. For example, it could be that these specific desired changes could be captured in visitor Codes of Conduct , which are commonly used in environmentally sensitive areas (Garrod and Fyall 1998; Mason and Mowforth 1996; Moore, Smith, and Newsome 2003; Moscardo 1996). By gaining a greater understanding of tourism development-related change, visitors could be motivated and empowered to reflect on and adjust their own impact-inducing behaviors.…”