Social Tourism

A general comparison of Social Tourism Activities between European Union countries and developing countries in Latin America.

Date of Submission: 05/05/2015

Mario Roma Momma D14126773

Emerging Issues in Hospitality, Tourism and Events (TFEV900)

MSc Hospitality Management

2

Introduction

The definition of Social Tourism derives from the right to travel, rest and leisure that

any human being has, assured by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in articles

13 (2) and 24 (United Nations, 1948). Its concept is also incorporated in other official

documents, agreed by several States and convened by The World Tourism Organization

(WTO), which declares the right of travel, rest and leisure despite one’s social status,

physical or mental disability, economic difficulties or any other barriers of any nature

(WTO, 1980) (1985). One possible explanation for such a strong background to support

leisure tourism activities is the benefits it promotes. Several authors researched different

protocols with different Social Tourism targets in order to evaluate these leisure tourism

generated benefits.

Social Tourism activities have the power to positively transform the life of disabled

persons as well as economically weak groups such as pensioners, unemployed and

single parents. Higgins-Desbiolles (2006), Smith & Hughes (1999), Minnaert, Maitland

& Miller (2009), Stone (2013), McCabe, Joldersma & Chunxiao (2010), McCabe

(2009) amongst other important researchers, argue that when participating in leisure

tourism activities, people with barriers or any sort of disability impeding them to do so,

receive significant benefits such as enhanced quality of life and improvement of

subjective well-being, strengthening of relationship among family members,

improvement in relationship of couples, better social awareness, promotion of social

inclusion, reduction in stress and improvement in the sense of self-esteem and feeling

happy. Shaw & Coles (2004) also argue that the benefits felt by the ones with disability

are practically the same as those with those with no disabilities, however persons with

difficulties in participating in leisure tourism feel these benefits with a higher level of

intensity in comparison to the persons that go on holidays regularly.

Even in Europe where Social Tourism has been significantly researched with many case

studies for the last 60 years, there are yet to be significant issues discussed in order to

have a better understanding of its complex concept and, in turn, create better services

for those who need help to go on holidays for a day, a weekend or longer (McCabe,

Diekmann, Minnaert, 2012). Minnaert, Maitland & Miller (2011) and Diekmann,

McCabe, Linnaert (2012) suggest that although Social Tourism is backed-up by many

international organizations such as The European Economic and Social Committee

3

(EESC), there is still an ethical issue involved that blocks its prosperity as some groups

of society still see tourism as a right and other groups see it as luxury. There are also

different needs and motivations amongst Social Tourism beneficiaries, making the

development of specific programs and therefore investment optimization a complex task

(Minnaert et al, 2011). Stone (2013) also argues about Social Tourism key issues in a

broader context, and in one of his publications it is stated that Social Tourism’s main

issue is deeply rooted and still not fully developed in most countries because ‘the scale

of task necessary to make a significant difference seems daunting, and a central issue is

that the concept of Social Tourism is unglamorous, boasts very few champions, and is at

root a contested concept’ (Stone, 2013, p.76).

As Social Tourism is not yet very precise and does not have a defined concept

worldwide, despite being well categorized by European researchers, the way that

countries are dealing with the challenges of promoting it varies and the reality in

developed countries is quite different than that in developing countries where, in theory,

there is a large portion of the population fitting the criteria of potential Social Tourism

beneficiaries. Higgins-Desbiolles (2006) defends that one of the problems in promoting

Social Tourism is prioritizing tourism marketisation, dealing with tourism as an

Industry rather than highlighting the actual tourism social force. An example of this

point is that developing countries promote tourism as an outward-oriented development

strategy, uniquely organized in a way of making it a profitable industry through

attraction of overseas tourists and therefore foreign money (Scheyvens, 2002). This

philosophy is partially manipulated by International Financial Institutions (IFI) such as

the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, as they encourage developing

countries to use tourism as a way of implementing neoliberal policies that in the end

will bring bigger financial benefits to these IFIs rather than socially and economically

the country itself. One of the key issues in this case is that not only do local resources

end up being owned by foreign organizations but there is also a great potential of

overseas earnings leakages (Brohman, 1996).

As one of the purposes of this work is to understand how Social Tourism is dealt with in

developing countries. When researching Social Tourism activities and its related target

groups, it is relevant to define some of the characteristics of developing countries and

relate them to what researchers have found in developed countries in Europe, from

different perspectives. For the purpose of this work, developing countries from Latin

4

America are taken into consideration where there are still considerable amounts of

people living in poverty and poor conditions. These people have low income (under

US$ 1,035.00 per capita), weak human resource indicators such as nutrition, health and

education, and economic vulnerability (United Nations, 2014), and despite

improvements identified amongst Latin American countries in some development

indicators for the last few years, they have yet to receive official development assistance

and are listed by the Development Assistance Committee (Scheyvens, 2011).

This work will set an overlook on Social Tourism understanding the point of view of the

beneficiaries and their barriers, disabilities and challenges, making a comparison

between developing countries in Latin America such as Brazil and Argentina and

developed countries in Europe such as France, Spain, Belgium and the United

Kingdom. The types of activities and programs carried out in those countries as well as

future trends are discussed, pointing out key characteristics and possible areas for

research.

Relevance of Social Tourism

As McCabe et al (2012, pp. 18-71) argue, in order for Social Tourism’s concept to be

put in practice and benefit the disadvantaged persons in the society, there must be a

structure formed by groups with different backgrounds that get involved in order to

successfully generate all the benefits above mentioned to the beneficiaries through

leisure tourism. The first group, called the beneficiaries or demand group (McCabe et

al, 2012), are those who have special needs, making the action of going on holidays

without assistance very difficult or even impossible. Examples of this group would be

low income families, people with physical or mental disabilities, elderly or single

parents. In practice, the types of barriers to travel can have more specific definitions

such as lack of information, lack of knowledge, lack of money, lack of transport, illness,

disability, age-related difficulties, time factors, lack of partner/friends, lack of interest

and lack of permission (McGuire, 1984; McGuire, Dottavio & O’leary, 1986, as cited

in McCabe 2009).

A second group, called the intermediaries, can be formed by a variety of services (to be

detailed later in this work) and they are responsible to facilitate and promote access to

tourism and leisure activities, which can be directly or indirectly funded by the state or

5

by private organizations. Haulot (1982) argued that the participation in tourism needs to

be facilitated or made possible by a well defined social agency in the public sector. The

International Social Tourism Organisation (ISTO) has argued, back in 1972 that it was

entirely the states responsibility to fund Social Tourism activities but later, in 1996, it

identified that not only the state was a possible Social Tourism provider but also

associations, social enterprises and private companies (Bélanger & Jolin, 2011). There

is a third group formed by the tourism suppliers, which must also have an adapted

structure aiming to meet the beneficiaries special needs, including transport,

accommodation and general touristic services (Diekmann et all, 2012). Whether it is

public or private funding, the groups in favor of Social Tourism, for example charities,

should contain clear social objectives of promoting accessibility and facilitation to

leisure tourism aiming at the largest possible number of people rather than aiming at the

maximization of profit (BITS, 1996).

Smith & Hughes (1999), Minnaert et all (2009), Minnaert et all (2012), Higgins-

Desbiolles (2006), generalize the contribution that charities give to Social Tourism

activities and how vital they are in order to facilitate holidays to the beneficiaries of

Social Tourism. Hunter-Jones (2011) however, explains that charities involvement are

classified according to its activities. Charities activities can be outside, within and above

the tourism industry, meaning that they can have different goals. Charities working

outside the tourism industry aim to raise funds, the ones working within the industry

focus in education and the ones above the industry target the individual values in

society, education and tourism practices (Turner, Miller & Gilbert, 2011 as cited in

Hunter-Jones, 2011). Moreover, Hunter-Jones (2011) sets an overview of how crucial

the role of charities are, through research findings in the UK and argue that despite all

challenges charities face such as lack of recognition, lack of resources, very limited

budgets, lack of training, not well defined positioning and structure in terms of where its

activities are concentrated (outside, within or above tourism industry), and not enough

support by the private sector, they are still very successful in facilitating holiday access

and promoting Social Tourism benefits to the beneficiaries.

Minnaert et al (2011) explain that in the developed countries in Europe, Social Tourism

is promoted in different ways according to the model that is driving the initiative.

France is an example of Social Tourism using the inclusion model, where not only the

disadvantaged persons but every single French person is encouraged to go on holidays

6

using a voucher called Chèques Vacances, a scheme promoted by private companies but

subsided by the government through tax relief. Belgium on the other hand, is an

example of the participation model promoting Social Tourism with its Holiday Centre

in Flanders, where the target group is specifically disadvantaged persons of society (e.g.

poor, physically disabled) and it is fully funded by the Flemish government

(Schapmans, 2012). The adaptation model has a good example of its practice in the

United Kingdom where, for example, a charity called Break provides special holiday

centers adapted for children (and their families) with learning disabilities and related

physical difficulties. The IMSERSO in Spain has a different approach than those

mentioned above. It not only benefits the elderly but also the commercial mass tourism

suppliers, as it facilitates tourism access to the elderly at lower prices during the low

occupancy season in the Spanish mass tourism resorts (Diekmann & McCabe, 2011).

As an example of Social Tourism activity in Latin American developing countries,

specifically Brazil, the Serviço Social do Comércio (SESC), (in English, Social Service

of Commerce) is an entity maintained by entrepreneurs from the private sector whose

main Social Tourism activity is based on the inclusion model by offering access to

holiday centers, installed in some of the capital cities of Brazil. It is aimed at workers

from the commerce sector and their respective families, through an annual cheap

membership that gives access to these leisure facilities all over Brazil (Cheibub, 2011).

Pereira, Neto & Zanini (2011) specify that the target group of SESC are not only

workers from the commerce sector and their families but also owners of commercial

businesses and any other person from society in fact. However, persons not from the

commerce sector that wish to use the holiday center or go on day trips will pay higher

rates. For the cultural excursions and day trips those beneficiaries from the commerce

sector and any person over 60 years old, are offered cheaper rates than the general

public. The SESC’s target groups are not limited to disadvantaged persons of society, in

fact Pereira, Neto & Zanini (2011) showed that the biggest portion of people who are

active users of SESC’ Social Tourism activities are from classes C, D and E according

to Associação Brasileira de Empresas de Pesquisa (ABEP), (in English, Brazilian

Association of Research Companies). These classes of society were people that had a

family monthly income ranging from 328.00 to 1,318 Reais, Reals in English, in 2009.

In December 2009, according to the average conversion rate between Real and Euro, 1

Real was equal to 0.39 Euro (X-RATES, 2009)

7

Who funds Social Tourism activities and how it is funded seemed to be the main issue

yet to be better solved. In practice, Social Tourism is promoted through leisure activities

that involve traveling to benefit an individual or a group with any type of social and/or

health disadvantage. In order for those activities to successfully reach the demand, it

must be facilitated and funded by one of the followings or a combination of them: direct

state funding (welfare policies), indirect state funding (charities), private sector

companies, trade unions or self-financed charities (Diekmann et al, 2012). As funding is

vital for the development of Social Tourism activities, and state financial support is not

yet in an ideal scenario (Hall & Brown 2012), Social Tourism activities are more likely

to be in a day trip format or are typically for a short period of time because it is less

expensive in comparison to long holidays and international trips (Minnaert, Maitland &

Miller, 2007; Minnaert et al., 2009a; Minnaert et al., 2011; Diekman & McCabe, 2011).

Social Tourism activities could have a different perspective, regarding the relation

between the type of disability or barriers impeding access to leisure tourism and the

country where these distinct groups of people live. The barriers faced by the

beneficiaries of Social Tourism are mainly directly related to lack of money to go on

holidays (Minnaert et all, 2011; Higgins-Desbiolles, 2006) and/or physical or mental

disabilities (Shaw & Coles, 2004). These variables are dealt with differently in

developed and developing countries, causing Social Tourism activities to be weak or

even nonexistent in less developed countries. Poverty for instance can be measured

from three perspectives: by income, meaning the lack of money to satisfy basic needs,

by capability, meaning what one can actually do with an income, and with a multi-

dimensional perspective, meaning that poverty is a combination of socio- economic and

political factors (Misturelli & Heffernan, 2008). The government of developing

countries and its population in general still have to fight against social inequalities,

inefficient health and transport services and low quality education, especially those with

any sort of disability (Vick, Posarac & Mitra, 2013). In addition, Braithwaite & Mont

(2009) explain the relationship between disability and poverty in developing countries

and argue how disability can lead to poverty and how poverty can directly relate to the

number of disabled persons in poor countries. In reality, disabled and poor persons

living in developing countries don’t receive the same social care and have more internal

and external barriers in comparison to those ones living in developed countries.

8

In Brazil, the biggest economy in Latin America, with its more than 190 million

inhabitants (IBGE, 2010), one of the poverty indicators is the number of minimum

salaries that form one’s monthly income. Around 80% of the population earn 1

minimum salary per month (Almeida 2011). Today’s Brazilian minimum salary is

788.00 Reais per month, the equivalent of 26.27 Reais per day or 3.58 Reais(around1

Euro) per hour (Agência Brasil, 2014). Therefore, according to the definition of Social

Tourism target groups, 80% of Brazilians are potential beneficiaries. Fundação Instituto

de Pesquisas Econômicas (FIPE), (in English, Economics Research Institute

Foundation) tailored a research programme for the Brazilian Tourism Ministry,

published in 2012 when the minimum salary per month was fixed at 622.00 reais

(Portal Brasil, 2012), with the objective to characterize and quantify the tourism

industry in Brazil. Results suggested that in 2011, 73.6% of inhabitants whom earned

between 0 to 4 minimum salaries didn’t go in any domestic trip. (FIPE, 2012, p.38).

Social Tourism Gaps

Social Tourism still needs to fill some critical gaps to really become a new and powerful

way of promoting social changes. For instance, despite strong theory that supports the

concept, in practice there is no single definition of Social Tourism and what it really

means as a whole, which gives its activities more of a welfare tourism perspective.

Also, as its activities can reach many different targets and can be developed in many

different ways, for example the different models that Minnaert et al (2011) discuss, are

normally classified more like a social force or a tool to reduce inequality among

countries, rather than simply a Social Tourism activity. Research is not yet well

integrated and it normally reflects only one country’s perspective of Social Tourism,

neglecting comparisons sometimes because of language barriers, and focus on specific

target groups only (Diekmann & McCabe, 2011).

“How social is Social Tourism” asks Diekmann & McCabe (2011). They argue that this

question is yet to be answered accurately and what is known is that in countries with

Social Tourism activities like Germany or Spain, Social Tourism still overlaps with

commercial mass tourism and depending on the degree of overlapping it indicates the

actual level of the social aspect of tourism. Also, depending on the type of funding,

9

Social Tourism can have a more commercial orientation if it is indirectly state funded

and a more social orientation if it’s directly state aided. For instance, SESC in Brazil

have their Social Tourism activities registered as a commercial tourism agency as any

other commercial tourism company with profit goals (Pereira, Neto & Zanini, 2011 p.

288). When analyzing these gaps in different countries and from different angles it is

possible to argue that depending on the model that these Social Tourism activities are

developed, they can lead to inclusion of some groups but exclusion of others.

When comparing Social Tourism activities between developing and developed

countries, and analyzing at what level Social Tourism facilitation is promoted, the

country’s public and social policies must be assessed. Countries with more public

involvement tend to be more efficient in bringing long-term benefits to the majority

rather than achieving short-term goals for the minority (Minnaert et al, 2009 p. 317;

Brohman, 1996; Jenkins & Henry, 1982). While the majority of developing countries

don’t yet have Social Tourism facilitators or, are not very well structured and supported

by the state, therefore having no specific policies or any planning aims to facilitate

tourism participation of various social disadvantaged groups (Brohman, 1996),

developed countries in Europe go beyond the fact that tourism is indeed an important

driver for economic growth and promote Social Tourism with public and private groups

involvement (Diekmann & McCabe, 2011). However in Ireland, where the tourism

industry positively influences economic growth, Social Tourism activities still lack of

general awareness and facilitators involvement, resulting in a lack of policies aimed

specifically to promote tourism for all activities (Griffin & Stacey, 2011).

In Europe and other developed countries around the globe such as USA, Australia and

New Zealand, accessible tourism has been discussed, developed and implemented in

different ways, but despite the countries’ legislation and policies towards the facilitation

of Social Tourism activities, public and private sectors are not yet well integrated and

there’s still a general lack of awareness about how important is to make tourism

accessed by all people. Since the 2009 Lisbon Treaty, policy makers in the European

Union are more committed to adopting and implementing a comprehensive Road Map

for Accessible Tourism due to the lack of adequate and accessible facilities in the

European countries (European Union, 2009). The ‘road map’ was initially proposed by

the European Network for Accessible Tourism (ENAT), which is committed to

reviewing old policies and have well defined objectives concerning accessible tourism

10

for all individuals, ensuring the implementation of the appropriate policies and changing

actual practices, and identification of needs and targets for future policies (Ambrose,

2012, pp. 19-35)

Conclusion

In comparison to developing countries, Social Tourism in Europe has a variety of

examples and cases, more cases and registered data is available, making the

comprehension of Social Tourism within the EU states a rich and valuable land for

benchmarking. Despite the need for further growth and improvements in Social

Tourism activities, the development of a better definition of its field and the sharing of

information amongst countries, it is assumed after this literature review that in

developed countries there is a constant positive movement towards generating benefits

for those who have any type of barrier and are blocked from going on holidays. There

are some good of examples of how much importance is given to Social Tourism in

Europe:

- Literature is written and studies were conducted searching for definitions

and stating its development back in 1980s;

- Researchers like Minnaert, Maitland, Miller, McCabe, Higgins-

Desbiolles, and others not only have been incentivizing research in the field

(Minnaert et all, 2009b) but they also have been studying social and

economic impacts and benefits of Social Tourism, as well as how it’s been

practiced in Europe, resulting in important findings in order to outline future

researches and promote different approaches to the way Social Tourism is

dealt with (Diekmann & McCabe, 2011);

- The existence of non-profit associations with the exclusive goal of

facilitating tourism, for example tourism facilitation for disabled persons, the

ENAT.

- The whole of Europe is involved, through the European Commission that

organizes conferences highlighting the best practices and investing in

research in the Social Tourism field (Diekmann & McCabe, 2011);

11

- A mix of different groups involved in order to facilitate the access to

tourism for all: government subsides, private sector investments, charities.

On the other hand, literature linking Social Tourism and developing countries was not

easily found, leading me to the perception that either developing countries don’t give

the same importance to tourism and its social benefits or Europe hasn’t yet deeply

researched the dynamics of Social Tourism in developing countries. Moreira de Lima &

Araújo da Costa (2014 p. 204) state that in Brazil even research into commercial mass

tourism and its relationship with economic development are not strong enough because

of lack of consistency of publications, lack of depth, and lack of structure.

Social Tourism’s purpose is to benefit those with disadvantages such as lack of money,

physical or mental disability amongst other barriers, and by definition, developing

countries have a considerable portion of the population under poverty conditionsand

therefore having a large number of disadvantaged persons that need help to go on

holidays (Moreira de Lima & Araújo da Costa, 2014; Almeida, 2011; Misturelli &

Heffernan, 2008). Contrary to developed countries, developing countries lack of

investment, government involvement and social policies when dealing with Social

Tourism. For example Brazil with a population around 190 million people, only one

private institution is promoting Social Tourism at a large scale (Almeida, 2011) based

on the ‘tourism for all model’. Or Argentina and all other Latin American countries

where the lack of social policies make access to tourism easier to the minority and

harder to the majority, still excluding many groups. (Schenkel, 2013).

Summarizing, in developed countries much more need to be done to improve Social

Tourism activities and accessibility but the path towards this goal is already previewed

and studied, making better results to be reached in a near future. A considerable number

of researchers are aware of Social Tourism’s importance and benefits (social and

economic) and pressure towards new policies and more government involvement will

be always an issue. In the end, the benefits generated and the ways of achieving them

will be the center of discussions.

However, in developing countries in Latin America, Europe and Asia with similar

social characteristics, the welfare system deals with budget constraints amongst other

big social issues, carrying welfare agents far away from dealing or planning leisure

tourism for poor communities, where leisure tourism engagement is blocked mainly by

12

lack of money, lack of time, or both (Hall & Brown, 2012). In these countries where

there are large social inequalities, inefficient infrastructure (health, educational and

transport systems), and lack of voice power, amongst other poverty indicators

(Scheyvens, 2011), the right of leisure, rest and travel is not considered to be as relevant

as they are in developed countries, and therefore welfare agents are not capacitated

enough to understand the real social value of tourism and promote it as a driver for

social change (Moreira de Lima & Araújo da Costa, 2014). On the other hand, in

Europe, as Minnaert et al (2009a) argue, not only welfare agents actively participate in

helping low income groups to have access to leisure tourism but also, they are crucial in

order to guarantee Social Tourism benefits and positive outcomes for the beneficiaries.

In countries where there is still a predominance of poverty,a lack of resources such as

limited access to water and sanitation, government policies have different priorities in

relation to developed countries. Sao Paulo, a city with approximately 20 million is

passing through a water crisis, meaning that its population is in risk of having restricted

access to water (JusBrasil, 2014).

It is implied that in developing countries not only is there a predominance of profit-

driven tourism policies aiming exclusively to attract foreign currency (Jenkins & Henry,

1982), but also tourism is mostly seen as a luxury, blocking the emergence of big

movements towards better social policies benefiting the disadvantaged members of

society, or even the creation of charities. It’s clear how important charities are in Europe

in order to successfully help disadvantaged persons to have access to leisure tourism. In

the literatures reviewed about Social Tourism activities in developing countries, there

wasn’t any important charity mentioned or how important they were for the respective

country, leading to assume that Social Tourism in developing countries still lack of

awareness and there’s still a lack of involvement of members of society, including

policy makers.

In developing countries there are considerable amounts of potential Social Tourism

target groups, and European examples show research paths that can be benchmarked.

Not only research regarding deeper understanding of Social Tourism and its

applications in developing countries is advisable, but also to understand disadvantaged

persons and their specific needs must be taken into consideration in order to identify

mechanisms of developing and promoting Social Tourism activities that best suit the

reality of a determined developing country.

13

BIBLIOGRAPHY Agência Brasil (2014), A partir de 1o de Janeiro de 2015, salário mínimo será R$ 788, Brasilia, Brasil. Available from http://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/economia/noticia/2014- 12/partir-de-1o-de-janeiro-salario-minimo-sera-de-r-788 [17/03/2015]. Almeida, M. V. (2011) The development of Social Tourism in Brazil, Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 5, pp. 483-89. Available from

http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=7b7132c4-9910-40cb- b45b-f0e806fc9709%40sessionmgr4005&vid=1&hid=4209 [17/03/2015]

Ambrose, I. (2012), European Policies for Accessible Tourism, in D. Buhalis, S. Darcy & I. Ambrose (eds.) Best Practice in Accessible Tourism. Inclusion, Disability, Ageing Population and Tourism (Aspects of Tourism) Bristol, United Kingdom: Channel View Publications, pp 19-35. Bélanger, C.E. & Jolin, L. (2011) The International Organization of Social Tourism (ISTO) working towards a right to holidays and tourism for all, Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 5, July 2011, pp. 475-82. Available from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hjh&AN=61156969&site=eh

ost-live [01/03/2015] Braithwaite, J. & Mont, D. (2009) Disability and Poverty: A survey of World Bank Poverty Assessments and implications, ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research, 3 (2009), pp. 219-32. Available from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1875067209000261/1-s2.0-

S1875067209000261-main.pdf?_tid=fd039418-d0eb-11e4-a3d6- 00000aacb35f&acdnat=1427067451_6e0d2d34c6c3d3548ec101e3e6a8744c [23/03/2015].

Brohman, J. (1996), New directions in tourism for third world development, in T. Huybers (ed.) Tourism in Developing Countries (Economics and Tourism 2) Glos, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, pp 5-27. Cheibub, B. (2011). Considerations on social tourism based on the institutional history of the social service of commerce (SESC) and the Brazilian academic production, Tourism and Management Studies, Special Issue, 1, pp. 486-96. Available from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hjh&AN=100384969&site=ehost-live [24/03/2015]

Diekman, A., McCabe, S. & Minnaert, L. (2012) ‘Social Tourism Today: Stakeholders, and supply and Demand Factors’ in S. McCabe, L. Minnaert & A. Diekmann (eds) Social Tourism in Europe Theory and Practice Bristol: Channel View Publications Diekmann, A. & McCabe, S. (2011) Systems of social tourism in the European Union: a critical review, Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 5, 2011, pp. 417-30. Available from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=fbd1d48f-84b5-46f2-

82ba-278dae5b915c%40sessionmgr4003&vid=1&hid=4214 [23/03/2015] European Union (2009) Lisbon Treaty, Lisbon. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/archives/lisbon_treaty/glance/index_en.htm [23/03/2015]

14

Griffin, K. & Stacey, J. (2011) Towards a ‘tourism for all’ policy for Ireland: achieve real sustainability in Irish tourism, Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 5, July 2011, pp. 431-44. Available from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hjh&AN=55139309&site=ehost-live [25/02/2015]

Hall, D. & Brown, F. (2012) ‘The Welfare Society and Tourism: European Perspectives’ in S. McCabe, L. Minnaert & A. Diekmann (eds) Social Tourism in Europe Theory and Practice Bristol: Channel View Publications, pp. 108-21 Haulot, A. (1982). Social Tourism: Current dimensions of future developments. Journal of Travel Research, 20, 3, pp. 207-212. Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2006) More than an “industry”: The forgotten power of tourism as a social force, Tourism Management, 27, 2006, pp. 1196-1203. Internation Bureau of Social Tourism (1996) Montreal Declaration Towards a humanist and social vision of tourism, Montreal. Available from: http://www.bundesforum.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Monreal_Declaration_Aubagne Addendum.pdf [14/03/2015] Jenkins C.L. & Henry B.M. (1982), Government Involvement in Tourism in Developing

Countries, in T. Huybers (ed.) Tourism in Developing Countries (Economics and Tourism 2) Glos, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, pp 135-57. McCabe, S. (2009) Who Needs a Holiday? Evaluating Social Tourism, Annals of Tourism Research,36(4), October 2009, pp. 667-88. Available from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2009-21983-

007&site=ehost-live [12/03/2015] McCabe, S., Joldersma, T. & Chunxiao, L. (2010) Understanding the benefits of social tourism: Linking participation to subjective well-being and quality of life, International Journal of Tourism Research, 12, June 2010, pp. 761-73. Available from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hjh&AN=55139309&site=eh

ost-live [12/03/2015]

McCabe, S., Minnaert, L. & Diekman, A. (eds) (2012) Social Tourism in Europe Theory and Practice Bristol: Channel View Publications. McCabe, S., Diekman, A. & Minnaert, L. (2012) ‘Conclusions and Future Researches’ in S. McCabe, L. Minnaert & A. Diekmann (eds) Social Tourism in Europe Theory and Practice Bristol: Channel View Publications Ministerio do Turismo (2012) Caracterização e dimensionamento do turismo doméstico no Brasil – 2010/2011 Relatório Executivo. São Paulo, Setembro 2012. Available from http://www.dadosefatos.turismo.gov.br/export/sites/default/dadosefatos/demanda_t uristica/domestica/downloads_domestica/Demanda_domestica_-_2012_-

15

_Relatorio_Executivo_nov.pdf [17/03/2015].

Minnaert, L., Maitland, R. & Miller, G. (2007) Social Tourism and its ethical foundations, Tourism Culture and Communication, 7, pp. 7-17. Minnaert, L., Maitland, R. & Miller, G. (2009a) Tourism and Social Policy: The value of Social Tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 36, 2, pp. 316-34. Available from http://ew5mz7jl6k.search.serialssolutions.com/?sid=EBSCO:Hospitality%20%26%20To urism%20Complete&genre=article&title=Annals%20of%20Tourism%20Research&atitle

=TOURISM%20AND%20SOCIAL%20POLICY%3A%20The%20Value%20of%20Social%20Tourism&author=Minnaert%2C%20Lynn&authors=Minnaert%2C%20Lynn%3BMaitland%2C%20Robert%3BMiller%2C%20Graham&date=20090401&volume=36&issue=2&spage=316&issn=01607383 [10/03/2015]

Minnaert, L., Maitland, R. & Miller, G. (2009b) Call for Papers: Special Edition of Current Issues in Tourism, Current Issues in Tourism, 12, 1, pp. 87-88. Available from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hjh&AN=43389456&site=eh

ost-live [25/03/2015] Minnaert, L., Maitland, R. & Miller, G. (2011) What is Social Tourism, Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 5, pp. 403-15.

Misturelli, F. & Heffernan, C. (2008) What is poverty? A diachronic exploration of the discourse on poverty from the 1970s to the 2000s, The European Journal of Development Research, 20, 7, pp. 666-684. Available from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=cfa1fde1-5916-476b-

917c-57a6f1379452%40sessionmgr4002&vid=0&hid=4214 [22/03/2015] Moreira de Lima, R. & Araújo da Costa, J. B. (2014) The paths of Tourism Develoment: the displacement of the income centralized approach to a people focused approach, Turismo e Sociedade, 7, 2, April 2014, pp. 201-27. Pereira, J., Neto, L. & Zanini, R. (2011) Central Bureau of Social Tourism SESC / Florianopolis-SC: Inclusion through social tourism, Turismo em Análise, 22, 2, August 2011, pp. 277-93.

Available from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=6f11f757- 4ecf-498e-be4a-b26f454b3bc0%40sessionmgr4003&vid=24&hid=4112 [24/03/2015]

Portal Brasil (2011), Salário Mínimo Brasileiro 2012, Brasilia, Brasil. Available from http://www.portalbrasil.net/salariominimo_2012.htm [17/03/2015]. Salles, C. (2014), Maior crise hídrica de SP expõe lentidão no governo e sistema frágil, JusBrasil. Available from http://carollinasalle.jusbrasil.com.br/noticias/114419870/maior-crise-

hidrica-de-sp-expoe-lentidao-do-governo-e-sistema-fragil [25/03/2015] Schapmans, M. (2012) ‘Case Study 2: Holiday Participation Centre (Steunpunt Vakantieparticipatie), Flanders, Belgium’ in S. McCabe, L. Minnaert & A. Diekmann

16

(eds) Social Tourism in Europe Theory and Practice Bristol: Channel View Publications, pp. 31-34 Schenkel, E. (2013) People’s right to tourism in Argentina. An approach from the perspective of social justice, Revista Lider, 22, 15, March 2013, pp. 189-206. Available from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=98776450&site=eh

ost-live [30/03/2015] Scheyvens, R. (2002). Tourism for development: Empowering communities. Harlow, England: Prentice-Hall. Scheyvens, R. (2011). Tourism and Poverty. New York, USA: Routledge, pp. 13-47 Shaw, G. & Coles, T. (2004) Disability, holiday making and the tourism industry in the UK: a preliminary survey, Toursim Management, 25, pp 397-403.

Stone, C. (2013), ‘Wellbeing, equity, sustainable development and social tourism in twenty first century Europe’ in J. Leigh, C. Webster & S. Ivanov (eds) Future Tourism. Political, social and economic challenges (Advances in Tourism) Oxon, England: Routledge, pp.52-79.

United Nations (1948) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Paris. Available from: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a13 [09/03/2015]

United Nations (2014) Development Policy and Analysis Division, LDC Criteria. Available from: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/cdp/ldc/ldc_criteria_id.shtml

[23/03/2015]

Vick, B., Posarac, A. & Mitra, S. (2013) Disability and Poverty in Developing Countries: A Multidimensional Study, World Development, 41, pp. 1-18. Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.05.024 [22/03/2015]. X-Rates (2009) Monthly Average Euro per 1.00 Brazilian Real. Available from http://www.x-

rates.com/average/?from=BRL&to=EUR&amount=1.00&year=2009 [24/032015]

World Tourism Organization (1985) Tourism Bill of Rights and Tourist Code, Sofia. Available from: http://www.univeur.org/cuebc/downloads/PDF%20carte/67.%20Sofia.PDF [09/03/2015]

World Tourism Organization (1985) The Manila Declaration on World Tourism, Manila. Available from: http://www.univeur.org/cuebc/downloads/PDF%20carte/65.%20Manila.PDF 09/03/2015]