Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility in Tourism

Half a century following the birth of environmental policies and authorities worldwide, businesses still argue they can significantly improve their performances voluntarily, based on instruments such as Corporate Social Responsibility. Likewise, having been challenged much earlier by social and labour policies, many corporate leaders are adamant that much has already been achieved and can still be improved voluntarily, in terms of how they interact with employees, stakeholders, local communities and citizens. In this chapter, we review key challenges that are not just outstanding, but continuously emerging for businesses and which require a significantly more proactive and impactful engagement with the world in which firms operate. We provide a brief overview of the milestones in the development of the Corporate Social Responsibility concept and the literature on the critiques regarding how businesses have responded to corporate responsibility calls. A critical analysis of the approaches and progress so far in terms of the scientific investigation of the implementation of this concept is also offered, highlighting areas that would benefit improvement. In the second part of the chapter the concept of Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR 2.0) is discussed, as proposed by Wayne Vissers and presented most recently in the 2014 book “CSR 2.0: Transforming Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility”. This will help map, in Chap. 2, the CSR 2.0 features discussed by the contributors to this volume. We also articulate a number of research themes to guide progress regarding the implementation of CSR 2.0 and explain how the chapters in this volume contribute to these themes as well.

This chapter presents a synthesis of the main features of the CSR 2.0 normative framework and articulates eight research themes. The chapter contributions in this volume are then discussed, focusing first on those pertaining to Part II—Assessing businesses willingness and ability to engage with CSR 2.0 themes. The second half of the chapter explains how authors engage with the four research themes concerned with the more detailed aspects of implementing initiatives, including how they put into practice business innovations and partnerships consistent with CSR 2.0.

While embarked in pursuit of a renewed sustainability agenda as spelled out by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, many travel businesses often concentrate on traditional approaches to resource management including environmental conservation, protection of biodiversity, judicious use of resources, etc. However, more recently, and particularly stemming from an updated conceptualization on corporate responsibility (Visser in Reframing corporate social responsibility: Lessons from the global financial crisis. Emerald, London, 2010a; Visser in J Bus Syst Gov Ethics 5(3): 1–17, 2010b), human rights and social justice issues such as the sexual exploitation of children gained new emphasis for most of the major travel and hospitality global brands, across the entire tourism sector. A first of its kind, the ‘Global Study on Sexual Exploitation of Children in Travel and Tourism’ (ECPAT International and Defence for Children-ECPAT Netherlands in Offenders on the move. Global study on sexual exploitation of children in travel and tourism, 2016) collected and analyzed data from all regions, and found that the travel sector has an extraordinary potential in critically intervening against human trafficking, with an emphasis on preventing and protecting child sexual exploitation. In this paper the global phenomenon of human sex trafficking is explored from a corporate responsibility perspective including its links to the travel and tourism sector. Examples of emerging innovative practices will be presented, including very recent case studies showing different paths taken to engage in preventing human trafficking by Marriott, Uber and by companies from the airline sector.

Until recently, charities and nonprofits have been the primary providers of recreational services for persons with disabilities (PwD). Increased pressure for a self-sustaining financial existence, as well as the acknowledgment of the value that the market of PwD has, have led to such services increasingly finding their way in competitive commercial environments as well. The chapter traces the development of inclusive holidays for persons with and without visual impairment based on sighted guiding from the historical changes in the understanding of the concept of disability as well as the provision of recreational and tourism services for PwD. The author argues that reverse integration—the approach that these holidays follow—is a viable and efficient way of offering equitable tourism services, particularly when businesses embrace social entrepreneurship. The chapter is built on the assumption that offering accessible and equitable tourism products for PwD is an integral element of corporate sustainability and responsibility in the tourism industry.

In this research demand and supply of Deaf People’s Tourism is undertaken. The requests and offers are put into comparison. It therefore takes a closer look at the “tourism for all” concept. The research shows that for deaf people two travel options exist: (1) Such, which are created for deaf people, only, and (2) others, that follow the “tourism for all” approach and include customized parts. Inclusion of hearing impaired exists, as they have the possibility to travel in a self-determined manner and choose from a variety of packages. Even intercontinental travel is offered. It can be said that the risk of social isolation that deaf people are faced with is reduced as there are diverse offers.

One of the biggest challenges facing the tourism industry and policy makers is the emerging and fast growing of the concept ‘sharing economy’ (SE). Many have considered this a disruptive influence in the tourism business, while others are acknowledging it as a potentially transformative phenomenon that has been challenging for industry, governments and researchers alike. The ‘sharing economy’ describes a new economic paradigm driven by technology, consumer awareness and social commerce—particularly through web communities, and can be thought of as sharing, lending, renting and swapping redefined through digital technology and peer communities. Intense debates around the impacts of the sharing economy on the tourism industry converge around issues such as consumer welfare, economic development, equitable competition, innovation and change. Much of this conjecture coalesces around the relative merits and impacts of potential regulatory measures that might be applied to businesses operating in the sharing economy and its integration into existing business models in tourism. The challenges brought by this innovation raise questions about how voluntarily adopted principles of corporate sustainability and responsibility, and its neoliberalist consumer culture values can be reconciled with more collectivist values promoted by some established tourism firms to protect consumers and incumbent industries. In the chapter, we argue that tourism businesses only marginally use the opportunities of the sharing economy and rather advocate a regulatory framework to combat the perceived competition from the sharing economy. As SE became part of the tourism industry, tourism businesses are exploring collaborative business models. Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR 2.0) principles and practices applied to the SE might provide a way forward for tourism businesses to be more consumer oriented, have specialised operations, be flexible, transparent and responsive to market trends. This might be a means to move beyond regulation of the SE in the tourism industry and establish new ways of doing business.

This chapter presents the results of a study designed to provide insights into Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) engagement in Small and Medium Tourism Enterprises (SMTEs). The study sought to determine CSR engagement in relation to owner-managers’ characteristics, the types of CSR practices SMTEs engage in, their motivations for doing so and the factors that affect their CSR engagement. The chapter begins with a review of literature relevant to this study, along with an overview of the methodology employed. Following this, key findings are presented. These suggest that whether an SMTE is owner-managed or not has the largest influence on a firm’s CSR engagement including: the motivations and benefits sought; the use of resources for CSR; types of CSR practices; and the overall formality and organisation of the CSR approach. Additionally, a ‘Fluid Model of SMTE Engagement in CSR’ is presented that depicts three types of CSR engagement by SMTEs: reactive, proactive, and active, along with the factors that potentially affect CSR engagement. The chapter concludes with a reflection on the study’s relationship to CSR 2.0.

The present study tackles the criticism of practical application of sustainable tourism by focusing on the knowledge transfer among the various stakeholders. At the core of it is the project ‘Tourism Research Innovation and Next Generation Learning Experience’ (TRIANGLE) Knowledge Alliance, which serves as an example of an innovative best-practice approach within the sustainable tourism domain. Not only does the TRIANGLE Knowledge Alliance nicely operationalize Moscardo’s framework for education for sustainability (EfS) in tourism, but it is also a good example of involving a wide range of actors for shared value creation in a collaborative setting, thereby underlining the principles of transformative Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR 2.0).

This book chapter will discuss the implementation of Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR) in the ecotourism industry, a tourism sector which has long been considered a frontrunner of sustainable tourism. The first section provides an analysis of the degree in which ecotourism has delivered on its aspirations to contribute to biodiversity conservation, while minimising resource use and promoting local socio-economic development. It will be shown that the private sector is expected to play a key role in achieving these goals. Thus, there is a clear relation to the concept of corporate sustainability and responsibility. However, so far ecotourism has rarely been discussed in this context. To gather empirical evidence, the author analysed to what degree members of the international Adventure Travel Trade Association adhere to, and meaningfully implement, CSR principles. 76 nature-based outbound operators were chosen as study objects. Based on content analysis of the companies’ websites, the results show that, despite a general commitment to sustainability, CSR is mostly practiced in an unsystematic way with very limited formal reporting or external certification. Philanthropy is more prominent than integrating CSR into the tour operators’ core business management. The CSR 2.0 level is seldom attained.

This chapter gives an explication of the way in which the airline industry performs and reports on Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR). The connected case study (see Chap. 11) uses Air France-KLM as example. It becomes clear that airlines’ attitudes towards CSR depend on their geographic location, business model, and business performance. Their reporting on CSR is generally of lower quality and mainly relates to environmental issues, while social and ethical issues are apparently either considered of lesser importance or are more difficult to operationalise. Concerning the environmental impact, for example, it appears that airlines with a green public image tend to score low on a climate change index. This finding evokes concern that airlines might use CSR reporting mainly for PR purposes. This chapter includes a section on ethical reflection on CSR in the airline industry and concludes that a more fundamental approach to the issue of unsustainable growth of aviation, restricted volume growth, needs active and robust government guidance and cooperation with the airline industry.

This case study provides an analysis of the way in which a leading airline company in the world, Air France-KLM, applies Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) within its business activities. The analysis is based on a conceptualisation of the term itself and the policy of and activities performed by the company. Other companies in the airline industry regard the Air France-KLM as a ‘good practice’ since it acts in an exemplary way on the integration of sustainability in the three major domains of CSR: economy, people and environment. It caters for environmental protection, customer experience, responsible human resources and local development. A challenge remains for the whole of the airline industry: to reconsider the very purpose of their business and start working on CSR 2.0. In CSR 2.0 sustainability, scalability, responsiveness and ‘glocality’ become part of an  airline’s very DNA and are not regarded mere ‘defensive’ measurements for satisfying the ‘customer’ and politics.

The expectations of tourists/visitors and the operational parameters of tourism/attraction providers, along with intentions and constraints of both parties, create a complex mixture of challenges that could be alleviated and eventually bring about transition for a more viable future of zoos management with a CSR approach that draws on Humanistic Management principles. In order to argue this point an overview over the topic zoo management set within the context of current CSR and humanistic developments is necessary. In conjunction with human attitudes towards non-human captive animals, they provide the basis to answer the question if humans and zoo management are prepared to alter their approach to those animals to a more humanistic management.

Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR) refers to organisational behaviours dedicated to the responsible use of natural resources, sensitivity to social capital or host culture and the sustainable distribution of economic wealth. These behaviours create social value and are in the interest of wider society. Organisations, including those who operate within the tourism industry, have been under longstanding social pressure to exhibit CSR behaviours. This social pressure has ultimately contributed to the emergence of sustainable tourism forms such as ecotourism. However, as this chapter recounts, there is no guarantee that the sustainability premise on which ecotourism has been founded will equate to actual responsible business behaviours. This chapter identifies that social and environmental failings observed within ecotourism may be a result of poor community consultation, ineffective ecotourism management and ‘inauthentic’ entrepreneurial motivations. It argues that should these failings be addressed, ecotourism does hold some potential to positively contribute to the tourism industries’ engagement with both sustainable and responsible behaviour. In part, this potential is dependent upon an ability to attract ‘altruistically motivated’ entrepreneurs to ecotourism business start-up, as these entrepreneurial types may represent a more reliable exponent of sustainable business behaviours. This proposition would be further supported where altruistic motivation is coupled with responsive ecotourism development, management and consultation. There is a role then for government and other tourism industry stakeholders to develop and offer support and management mechanisms for altruistically motivated ecotourism developments.

The contribution of tourism businesses to sustainability is generally assessed based on two policy lenses: a) responses to regulatory provisions and financial instruments; and b) voluntary actions, such as those under the traditional CSR umbrella. The CSR 2.0 agenda extends the range of business responsibilities to include their engagement in the design of sustainability policies and governance. Drawing on the PARO framework for public engagement evaluation (Policy - Activities - Recruitment methods - Objectives of participation) developed by the author, this chapter examines whether tourism businesses in New Zealand used their capacities of policy-making stakeholders to incorporate sustainability provisions in the 2025 National Tourism Strategy. The findings show that generous engagement options were available to tourism businesses: the ‘self-selection’ and ‘targeted selection’ recruitment methods, which were available for all policy-making activities), based on the participatory objectives of ‘empowerment’ and ‘analytical input’. However, no sustainability provisions were included in this key instrument, other than commercial priorities. The inclusion of considerations regarding how businesses exercise their policy stakeholder roles would enable more holistic assessments of how businesses engage with the sustainability agenda.

CSR 2.0 enlarged the area of corporate responsibility to that of policy-making. Businesses are challenged to help codesign governance and policy frameworks that are more effective at environmental protection. Such frameworks can help create the level-playing field among competitors—which businesses often invoke as necessary for them to engage in more ambitious environmental improvement targets. This case-study argues that the tourism sector in New Zealand missed an important opportunity to map and incorporate environmental performance measures and criteria into a key policy document of relevance for sustainable tourism: the 2008–2018 negotiated agreements for the allocation of tourism concession in limited-supply contexts, in Protected Areas. By applying the PARO framework (Policy Activities—Recruitment methods—Objectives), it is shown that special and generous stakeholder engagement opportunities were offered to the tourism industry representative organisation to co-design this policy instrument.

Based on existing studies, this article shows the demand potential for sustainable tourism. Although sustainability is generally not the first criterion for making a travel decision, many holidaymakers are principally interested in travelling sustainably. In terms of volume, it can be summarised that approximately a third of tourists are interested in sustainable tourism or at least in specific sustainability aspects. In addition to consumers with an affinity for and awareness of sustainability, the LOHAS in particular are an affluent customer group and therefore an interesting demand segment as are certain niche tourism groups. In the business trips and the MICE sectors too, sustainability is increasingly becoming a selection criterion. With regard to willingness to pay, the studies come to contradicting conclusions. However, there is some evidence indicating that tourists are not willing to pay significantly more for sustainable features of a tourism product. The existing awareness and positive attitudes towards sustainable travel, which have been documented in numerous studies, and also the general development of lifestyle trends, permit the conclusion that in future sustainability will become increasingly important to travellers.

This chapter investigates from a policy perspective an unusual approach to corporate and societal responsibility, initiated by neoliberal governments in New Zealand in early 2010s. Expectations have been institutionalised that economic agents and communities assume responsibilities for nature protection and infrastructure maintenance in Publicly Protected Areas (PA) managed by the Department of Conservation (DOC) through volunteering, donations or corporate sponsorships, while the competent authority transitions towards facilitatory and enabling roles. This has been presented as a 100 years strategy and includes, as target group, all tourism businesses holding concessions to operate in PA. A framework for the study of implementation prospects from behavioural perspectives, referred to as Persuade-Enable-Constrain, is applied for an early assessment of concessionaires’ responses based on interviews. Findings reveal policy interplays not studied before, with significant potential pitfalls in terms of environmental effectiveness. The application of the framework also reveals how factors in the realm of actors’ resources, knowledge base, motivations and their boundary judgements on sustainability are likely to converge to prevent a widespread implementation of this governmental strategy. Key risks to an institutionalised approach to Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR) in PA are identified. Recommendations are articulated for alternative approches to CSR appeals that are more likely to receive target group support, in the context of preserving PA service delivery leadership for governments.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has too often been implemented as symbolic alternatives to direct regulations. As a result, CSR 1.0 has often failed to generate meaningful real-life changes. This case study examines a private sector ecotourism company, Wilderness Safaris, and how measures recently implemented are suitable to deliver radically better societal contributions and environmental improvements. Such measures include long-term meaningful investments in, and proactive involvement for, community development and biodiversity conservation. Such governance innovations and practices are consistent with the new concept of Corporate Sustainability and responsibility (CSR 2.0). The company’s philosophy of building sustainable economies around nature protection goes beyond the legal requirements of business impact minimisation, while ensuring that communities and biodiversity benefit from how Wilderness Safari carries out its business. The study is based on the analysis of five years of company annual report data on financial aspects and contributions to conservation and community development. The analysis demonstrates that both biodiversity conservation and local communities can benefit from new ways of doing business, which can also enhance corporate reputation while enhancing the quality of its nature based products and services. Suggestions are put forward as to how the private sector can further promote biodiversity conservation and local community development to ensure that CSR 2.0 truly makes a long-term persistent difference, in contrast to the previous attempts under the CSR 1.0 umbrella.

Recent studies indicate a trend towards sustainable food products, resulting in a rise of gastronomic businesses with sustainable food menus. However, there is little knowledge about the importance of sustainable food offers in the holiday context. This chapter aims to provide a comprehensive definition of the concept of sustainable food in the travel context and to discuss the sustainability challenges encountered along the food production process. Based on the results, a framework for implementation, as well as good practices in sustainable food operations are presented along the food production process chain of purchasing, menu planning and menu design, food preparation, food provision and service, and efficient waste management. Thereby, a special focus is given to the local aspect of food products, in addition to the necessary collaborative efforts of a multitude of stakeholders for sustainable food provision.

This chapter evaluates a program displaying features of Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR 2.0) of a Turkish company specialized in beverage production, which decided to dedicate a large part of its CSR agenda to sustainable tourism. The programme was planned and implemented in collaboration with the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). We focus our analyses on the good corporate governance dimension of CSR 2.0, for which we evaluate the operationalization of a selection of indicators we put forward: the cross sector social partnerships, dynamic co-creation of value, leadership and transparency. The potential contribution of this programme to a selected set of the 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is also being assessed. Empirical findings suggest that all selected indicators are complementary in achieving social value and contribute indeed to some key SDGs. The results also indicate the need to identify alternative operationalizations and additional indicators for good corporate governance of CSR 2.0, in different tourism contexts.

This chapter focuses on the presentation of the Destination Network Responsibility (DNR) concept. While Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility (CSR) refers to the individual responsibility of a tourism company, the Destination Network Responsibility describes the responsibility of a tourism destination network or the so-called “virtual service company”. It is analyzed and discussed to what extent the concept of CSR can be transferred from the company level to the network level of the destination and what conditions and processes are associated with it. Particular interest is given to the identification of the potentials that can result from a systematic network approach in a tourism destination. Besides, relevant fields of action and expected challenges in connection with the establishment and activation of a destination-wide network of responsibility will be worked out.

A set of 29 criteria and 59 corresponding indicators, mainly derived from the Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria for Destinations (GSTC-D), was used to assess and evaluate the level of sustainable tourism in the city of Dubrovnik. The results revealed that the proposed criteria, indicators and norms were found to be basically suitable and feasible within a limited timeframe to assess and evaluate sustainable tourism in city destinations. It could also be shown that current tourism in the old town of Dubrovnik is hardly sustainable. Major deficits were identified in the lack of a well-functioning DMO, a missing sustainable tourism strategy and insufficient visitor management. Especially, the too rapid growth rates in cruise ship tourism are threatening the cultural heritage and tourism acceptance in the old town. This implies an alarming trend with urgent need for actions towards CSR 2.0 principles. Collaborative work to bundle activities and projects initiated by different tourism stakeholders in the city supported by the establishment of a destination management organization (DMO) to coordinate these different activities and stakeholders are considered important measures for sustainable tourism development.