INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr.242
Attitudes in the Danish Tourism Industry
to the Roles of Business and Government
in Sustainable Tourism
Bill Bramwell* and Lone Alletorp
Centre for Tourism, Shef®eld Hallam University, City Campus, Pond Street, Shef®eld SI 1WB, UK
ABSTRACT
The introduction of more sustainable forms
of tourism in a country is likely to be the
result of a combination of government
regulations and other interventions and
businesses making their own decisions in
response to the market. This paper examines
attitudes among senior managers in the
Danish tourism industry to where prime
responsibility lies for promoting sustainable
tourism practices. The opinions of these
senior industry managers are also reported on
incentives and obstacles to the adoption of
sustainable tourism practices, on external
assistance that may encourage the
introduction of these practices, and whether
there should be more government
regulations to encourage their adoption.
Industry attitudes in Denmark to these issues
are of particular interest because of the
relative prominence of environmental issues
in the country. Copyright # 2001 John Wiley
& Sons, Ltd.
Received 20 May 1999; Revised 22 September 1999; Accepted
28 September 1999
Keywords: sustainable tourism; industry self-
regulation; government intervention; industry
attitudes; partnerships.
* Correspondence to: B. Bramwell, Centre for Tourism,
Shef®eld Hallam University, City Campus, Pond Street,
Shef®eld SI 1WB, UK.
E-mail: w.m.bramwell@shu.ac.uk
INTRODUCTION
T
ourism often requires speci®c infrastruc-
ture, brings visitors into destination
areas, consumes scarce resources and
generates waste, and in such ways can
produce adverse environmental and social
impacts. As the tourism industry depends on
the quality of natural, built and cultural
resources in destination areas, it might be
expected that the industry would actively
promote sustainable forms of tourism. How-
ever, Middleton and Hawkins (1998, p. 117)
conclude from a review of sustainable tourism
initiatives in several continents that `Most
businesses have thus far avoided the key
issues of sustainability'. What limited evidence
there is suggests that, although some larger
tourism businesses have been more active,
many of the steps taken by the tourism
industry have been limited in scope and
piecemeal in character (King and Weaver,
1993; Brown, 1994; Horobin and Long, 1996;
Kirk, 1998). It is appropriate to ask why the
implementation of environmental and social
measures by the tourism industry has been
relatively limited. It is also relevant to consider
how the industry might be encouraged to
introduce more sustainable practices.
This paper examines two speci®c issues
affecting the adoption of more sustainable
activities by the tourism industry. First, con-
sideration is given to the balance between
government intervention and industry self-
regulation in order to encourage the industry
to become more sustainable. Second, examina-
tion is made of the attitudes of tourism
industry decision-makers to the adoption of
sustainable tourism measures. Both issues are
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
92
evaluated in a survey of senior tourism
industry managers in Denmark, with the
survey asking them about the adoption of
sustainable tourism practices and whether
prime responsibility for promoting these prac-
tices rests with the industry or with govern-
ment. The industry in Denmark was chosen for
study because of the relatively high level of
environmental concern in the country.
INDUSTRY SELF-REGULATION
In most countries the response to environ-
mental and cultural concerns about tourism
has largely been to rely on individual and
corporate responsibility through industry self-
regulation. Several arguments are put forward
in favour of self-regulation. It is suggested that
it is in companies' own long-term self-interest
to behave in a socially responsible manner and
that they ought to have to take account of the
adverse consequences of their actions. Giving
responsibility for social performance to man-
agement can also harness the creative ability of
managers to solve problems and encourage
them to act in more responsible and responsive
ways (Field, 1994). An emphasis in legislation
on minimum standards that companies must
meet would provide businesses with no
incentives to exceed those standards (Hjalager,
1996). A regulatory approach also puts respon-
sibility for policing on to a government
inspectorate who are typically poorly re-
sourced and thinly spread, and who in a
policing role are less able to act as advisers
and consultants (Peattie, 1992, 1995).
A moral business might introduce sustain-
able tourism measures as it seeks to do what
is believed to be right for society and
the environment. A more pragmatic basis
for business decisions might be that such
measures eventually will bene®t the com-
pany concerned, such as by generating PR
and improving the company's image, or that
they provide it with enhanced pro®ts in the
short-term. In practice it is very dif®cult to
disentangle a company's moral motives (if
they are signi®cant) from its self-interest in
relation to a particular socially responsible
strategy (Peattie, 1992; Cannon, 1994).
Stabler and Goodall (1997) suggest that for a
tourism business the potential bene®ts of
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
B. Bramwell and L. Alletorp
adopting environmental measures are both
direct and indirect. Direct measures might lead
to direct improvements to competitiveness and
pro®tability, and may include creating im-
proved products or new markets and reducing
operational costs by making more ef®cient use
of energy and by reuse and recycling to
minimise waste. Indirect bene®ts may only
affect competitiveness and pro®tability more
indirectly or less frequently. These bene®ts
might include an enhanced image, gaining a
reputation as an ethical company, creating
more favourable attitudes toward possible
future development plans for a tourist facility
by improving local community relations, and
meeting customer requirements for environ-
mental quality. Some bene®ts may be particu-
larly long-term, such as the retention of the
attractive or distinctive environmental, social
and cultural qualities of a tourist destination.
However, these potential bene®ts can all be
viewed as strategies to maximise value for
shareholders in a business context where
society is becoming more conscious of envir-
onmental and community issues. In addition
to their shareholders, individual businesses
interact with a number of stakeholders, in-
cluding customers, the community, employ-
ees, investors, insurers, the media and
pressure groups. Some of these stakeholders
are at least as interested in the company's
environmental record as they are in its
®nancial performance. They increasingly ex-
pect companies to take due care and respon-
sibility towards the environment as an integral
part of doing business. At the same time, the
shareholders or investors have most in¯uence
on the managers who set the objectives of the
business, and they may well emphasise short-
term pro®tability above all else.
Whether the owners or managers of tourism
businesses introduce more sustainable prac-
tices may be affected by their awareness of the
issues and of what they can do. In a study of
owner-managers of small tourism businesses
in a UK national park, Horobin and Long
(1996, p. 15) found that `although there is a lot
of sympathy with the general principles of
sustainability, there is general confusion
around the term ªsustainabilityº and even
ªenvironmental concernº'. Berry and Ladkin
(1997, p. 439) also found that among the
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
Business and Government Roles in Sustainable Tourism
owner-managers of small tourism businesses
in East Sussex, UK there was `little under-
standing of the concept of sustainable tour-
ism'. More generally, Middleton and Hawkins
(1998, p. 117) conclude from a review of
sustainable tourism measures in many coun-
tries that `awareness of the need for sustain-
able tourism goals, and for changes of
behaviour on the part of businesses and
visitors at destinations, are still in the early
stages'.
Decision-makers in tourism businesses also
need to display an interest in environmental
and community issues and also to be inclined
to take action. A survey of attitudes to
environmental management in the hospitality
sector on the island of Guernsey found `a quite
remarkable lack of awareness and sense of
responsibility, if not indifference' (Stabler and
Goodall, 1997, p. 30). Horobin and Long's
(1996, pp. 18±19) study of a UK national park
found that `many small tourism business
owners recognize the importance of sustain-
able tourism development but do not neces-
sarily identify a central role for themselves in
its implementation'. By contrast, Berry and
Ladkin (1997, p. 439) suggest that many of
the small tourism businesses in East Sussex
`are willing to co-operate if given workable
solutions and practical advice'. According to
Middleton and Hawkins (1998) comparatively
more steps are being taken by larger tourism
®rms to respond to environmental issues as
they are subject to greater third-party scrutiny,
and Goodall (1995) considers that environ-
mental auditing is more common in large than
in small tourism ®rms.
GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION
Government can seek to secure the adoption of
sustainability measures by tourism operators
by intervening in the operation of the market.
One argument in support of such intervention
is that it encourages or even compels busi-
nesses to include in their own internal
accounting and decisions the costs and bene®ts
for the environment and society, when other-
wise they are unlikely to take these into
account. Hence, ®rms tend to overproduce
tourism products with external costs (because
they do not pay for externalities) and to
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
93
underproduce those with external bene®ts
(because they receive no or little share of
external bene®ts) (Field, 1994; Buhalis and
Fletcher, 1995). For example, the construction
of a holiday village may restrict public access
to a wooded area, with this being an external
cost as it affects a third party, the community,
but it is not included in the accounting and
decision-making of the holiday village devel-
oper. Similarly, a tourist business may pollute
an area near its facility as this reduces its costs
and makes it more competitive. Forsyth et al.
(1995, p. 271) argue that `If suppliers of tourism
services spoil the environment without paying
for the damage they incur they are engaged in
theft from residents'.
Several types of government policy instru-
ments can be used to encourage the industry to
introduce environmentally and socially re-
sponsible practices (Bramwell, 1998). There
can be government encouragement through
information, education and general persuasion
directed to tourism businesses, such as a
government-led voluntary `green' rating
scheme for businesses adopting environmen-
tally friendly initiatives. Second, government
®nancial incentives can be used to alter the
prices facing businesses for environmentally
or culturally damaging or bene®cial beha-
viour. For example, hotels can be charged for
water consumption in order to encourage
water conservation or receive payments for
the introduction of energy saving techniques
(Hunter and Green, 1995). Third, government
regulations can be put into place which either
prohibit or require particular courses of action,
with compliance backed by law, but which do
not involve ®nancial incentives (Jacobs, 1991;
Lin and Hemmington, 1997). For example,
there might be regulations concerning limits
on the discharge of pollutants or on the height
of hotels in a resort (Nijkamp and Ver-
donkschot, 1995).
Individual small tourist businesses may be
reluctant to adopt sustainable practices in their
business or pay to improve the physical or
cultural resources in the tourist destination
because their actions may also bene®t numer-
ous rival businesses in the destination Ð so-
called `free-riders'. The large number of small
tourism businesses in a destination may
encourage individual businesses to consider
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
94
they cannot make a signi®cant difference to the
environment or to conclude that responsibility
lies elsewhere. As Middleton and Hawkins
(1998, p. 6) contend: `It is a major structural
problem in tourism that small businesses
located at destinations, such as hotels or
attractions, and tour operators negotiating
down the prices of product components from
distant bases in markets of origin, have not
needed to accept responsibility individually
for what is happening overall to the local
environment'. There is also evidence suggest-
ing that tourists are not speci®cally demanding
from the industry so-called `green' labels on
holiday products, although it appears they
might not return to destinations that fail to
offer reasonable environmental quality. These
obstacles to the industry initiating sustainable
tourism measures provide further potential
justi®cations for increased government inter-
vention.
In practice there is likely to be a mix of
government intervention and businesses mak-
ing their own decisions in response to market
forces. As indicated previously, the market has
major shortcomings, but it can be effective at
responding quickly to changing market condi-
tions, providing incentives and at encouraging
innovation. It is suggested by Middleton and
Hawkins (1998, p. xi) that in order to promote
sustainable tourism `Regulation can, at best,
establish the ground rules for competition and
aim to penalize individuals and organizations
¯outing the rules. But it is a blunt instrument
for persuasion in a free market'. More speci-
®cally they argue that the government role
should remain limited, as public sector man-
agers have a `knowledge de®cit' about tourism
generally, and tourist demand in particular.
This de®cit arises because they often have only
limited direct experience and understanding
of tourist requirements and tend to be back-
ward-looking to existing notions of resources
rather than forward-looking toward trends
and new uses.
In many cases the environmental and social
policies of government are perceived as
increasing the costs falling on business and
hence a threat to business survival and success.
However, such policies also change the com-
petitive climate facing the industry and can
generate new business opportunities. It is up to
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
B. Bramwell and L. Alletorp
each ®rm to respond in the most cost-effective
way to these policies, and it has been
suggested that the development of proactive
strategic policies by ®rms can reduce these
costs and establish a competitive advantage
(Forsyth, 1997).
SURVEY AIMS AND THE DANISH
CONTEXT
The survey was conducted with a sample of
senior decision-making staff of 47 tourism
organisations in Denmark. The survey exam-
ined the attitudes of these organisations to the
roles of government and industry in the
industry's adoption of sustainable tourism
actions. In particular it sought opinions on:
(1) the types of practices of sustainable tourism
currently adopted
(2) the perceived main incentives to the adop-
tion of these practices
(3) the perceived main obstacles to the adop-
tion of these practices
(4) the external assistance considered most
helpful to encourage the adoption of these
practices
(5) whether there should be more government
regulations to encourage their adoption;
(6) whether prime responsibility should lie
with government or industry for initiating
sustainable tourism practices.
Denmark was chosen for the case study
because of the prominence of environmental
issues in the country. For example, in a 1990
survey by Touche Ross, 70% of Danish
companies responding felt under shareholder
pressure to improve their eco-performance,
compared with only 20% in The Netherlands
and 9% of UK companies (cited in Peattie, 1995,
p. 62). A particularly large proportion of the
tourists visiting Denmark are also from coun-
tries characterised by relatively high levels of
concern for the environment. For example,
among hotel nights in Denmark in 1994 spent
by international tourists, as many as 28.1%
were accounted for by Germans, 22.9% by
Swedes and 14% by Norwegians (OECD,
1996). Weston (1996, p. 25) suggests that, in
addition to traditional forms of tourism, `Den-
mark is ¼ relying on its clean image to attract
the ever-growing numbers of environment-
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
Business and Government Roles in Sustainable Tourism
conscious tourists'. Private houses to rent
(summerhouses) and camping sites comprise
a substantial proportion of Denmark's tourist
accommodation. Aderhold et al. (1993, p. 197)
conclude that the `Danes are generally very
aware of their environment and consistently
apply this awareness to tourist development'.
According to the OECD (1996, p. 41), in
Denmark `A clear precondition for all govern-
ment actions in the ®eld of tourism is that these
must be done with every consideration of the
environment'.
SURVEY METHODS
Tourism organisations largely involved in
outbound tourism from Denmark were ex-
cluded from the survey. This was because the
survey investigates attitudes to the balance
between government involvement and indus-
try self-regulation within the part of the
Danish tourism industry dealing with tourists
in Denmark. A range of tourism businesses
and trade or industry associations was in-
cluded in the survey as well as some regional
and local tourism associations, with these
working closely with private sector operators.
In the research design the tourism industry
was divided into six sectors, with the survey
administered to a subsample in each of these
sectors: regional tourism associations (5), local
destination agencies (5), industry or trade
associations (10), accommodation (10), attrac-
tions (8), and transport and tour operations (9).
Denmark's regional tourism associations are
public±private partnerships involved in pro-
duct development, marketing and information
provision in the regions. They have been
established over the past four years, with
government funding declining over a ®ve-year
period, after which they are expected to be
®nancially independent. Local destination
agencies undertake similar activities for smal-
ler geographical areas and are also partner-
ships between the public sector and
commercial operators and local tourism asso-
ciations (Ministry of Business and Industry,
1994; Danish Tourist Board, 1997). The re-
gional and local destination agencies were
included as they have important co-ordinating
functions for tourism management in destina-
tion areas in Denmark (Godfrey, 1998).
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
95
The sampling sought to obtain a range of
organisations in each sector by geographical
location, by large, medium and small size, and
by speci®c types of organisation. Membership
lists of several industry associations were used
to identify the sample. These included lists for
the Association of Attractions in Denmark
(1998), Association of Danish Travel Agents
and Tour Operators (1998), Association of the
Hotel, Restaurant and Tourism Industry in
Denmark (1997), Association of Danish Youth
Hostels (1998), Danish Camping Board (1998),
Danish Holiday Cottage Rental Association
(1998), and the Joint Council of the Danish
Tourist Trade (1998). Regional tourism asso-
ciations and local destination agencies were
sampled from the 1997±98 yearbook of tourism
organisations produced by the Danish Tourist
Board.
A total of 47 interviews were conducted over
4 weeks in 1998, with 17 undertaken face-to-
face and 30 by telephone. The interviews
followed a structured schedule of questions,
were all undertaken by one of the authors, and
care was taken to ensure that the wording was
applied consistently. On average the face-to-
face interviews took 40 min and the telephone
interviews took 30 min. Of the 56 tourist
organisations contacted, eight stated they were
unable to participate as it was the main tourist
season and one refused to be interviewed.
These non-respondents were in tourist busi-
nesses of varying types and sizes. The research
was sponsored by the Danish Tourist Devel-
opment Centre, a centre established in 1996 by
the Ministry for Business and Industry and the
Joint Council of the Danish Tourist Trade in
order to assist tourism businesses to improve
their competitiveness (OECD, 1996; DTDC,
1998). The involvement of this centre in the
research appears to have encouraged senior
staff in several tourist organisations to agree to
be interviewed.
Respondents were asked about the adoption
of sustainable tourism practices in the Danish
tourism industry. Hence, it was considered
important that the respondents were aware of
the broad de®nition of sustainable tourism
adopted by the researchers. A short de®nition
was included with the letter explaining the
research that was posted to respondents prior
to their interview. The de®nition included
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
96
economic, social and cultural concerns, as well
as the environmental issues more often asso-
ciated with sustainable tourism. For example,
sustainable tourism was described as tourism
that `respects the culture, ways of life and
socio-economic structures of local commu-
nities', and also creates `a balance between
production and consumption, taking into
account the environment, in a way that does
not reduce the economic health of businesses'.
This de®nition was developed by the Danish
Tourism Development Centre for a project to
promote sustainability in tourist destinations.
The interviewer also discussed the de®nition
with respondents at the start of the interview.
SURVEY RESULTS
Respondents were asked to identify the sus-
tainable tourism practices adopted in their
sector of the tourism industry. Table 1 shows
that the most frequently mentioned practice by
all sectors other than attractions and transport
and tour operations was involvement in the
Danish `Green Key' environmental certi®ca-
tion scheme. This is a voluntary scheme for
tourist accommodation, which can be awarded
the `Green Key' eco-label if it ful®ls a series of
compulsory criteria, and if it commits to meet
other compulsory criteria as well as at least six
out of 10 `ideal criteria'. Compulsory criteria
include energy management and maximum
use of low energy light bulbs, waste separation
at source, and at least two organic products for
breakfast. The scheme is sponsored by such
organisations as the Association of the Hotel,
Restaurant and Tourism Industry in Denmark,
the Open Air Council and Danish Tourist
Board. Table 1 also shows that some regional
tourism associations and local destination
agencies were working with the public sector
to promote sustainable tourism. In the attrac-
tion sector the most frequently mentioned
practices were cost cutting measures, such as
the reduction of energy consumption and
savings on packaging, and water and waste
management. Many of the transport operators
described steps to reduce pollution, such as
using less polluting fuel, monitoring fuel
emissions and managing sea waste.
Table 2 shows that 20 of the 47 respondents
identi®ed increasing customer awareness of
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
B. Bramwell and L. Alletorp
environmental issues and the emergence of
green consumerism as a main incentive behind
the adoption of sustainable practices. The next
most frequently mentioned incentives were
the potential cost savings to business and also
the ethical beliefs of people in tourism organi-
sations. Relatively few respondents identi®ed
as an incentive the pressures from existing
government regulations or the avoidance of
new regulations.
The perceived main obstacles to the adop-
tion of sustainable practices are shown in Table
3. A large proportion of those questioned
brought up problems related to the cost and
to effects on business pro®tability and compe-
titiveness. As many as 25 mentioned the
investment cost of introducing these practices
and 15 stated it was dif®cult to make invest-
ments in the tourism industry because of its
unfavourable treatment in Denmark's taxation
regime, which was reducing its pro®tability.
Many respondents complained that tourism
was being handicapped because the full rate of
a `green tax' was levied on its energy con-
sumption when other industries bene®ted
from a reduced rate. Energy consumed by
other industries was taxed at a lower rate as
energy consumed for economic production,
whereas energy consumed by tourism busi-
nesses was not de®ned in this way and was
taxed at the full rate (Christensen and Faur-
holdt, 1998). It was also felt that the competi-
tive position of Danish tourism businesses in
Europe was further weakened by the country's
high Value Added Tax rate of 25%. An obstacle
mentioned by seven respondents was the
negative attitudes in the industry to sustain-
able tourism or a lack of knowledge about
what it entailed.
Table 4 shows that the form of external
assistance considered most helpful to encou-
rage the adoption of sustainable tourism
practices was access to expert assistance,
notably advice from an independent consul-
tant. This form of assistance was mentioned by
22 of the 47 respondents, perhaps in¯uenced
by the use of consultants in the `Green Key'
scheme for accommodation. In this voluntary
scheme the consultants have a guidance role,
helping accommodation providers to imple-
ment the scheme's criteria, and also an inspec-
tion function, ensuring the criteria are ful®lled
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
Business and Government Roles in Sustainable Tourism 97

Table 1. Sustainable tourism practices currently adopted (frequency of mentions are shown in brackets, and
these are put in rank order)
Sector Sustainable tourism practices
Regional tourism associations (n = 5):
Encouraging or assisting others to implement the `Green Key' scheme (3)
Liaising with the public sector to promote sustainable tourism (2)
In¯uencing and supporting government pilot projects (such as a study of tourism carrying capacity in three
local council districts) (2)
Recycling paper, using low energy light bulbs (2)
Giving advice on sustainable tourism (1)
Involvement in an environmental award for businesses (1)
Involvement in an environmental week for businesses (1)
Local destination agencies (n = 5):
Encouraging or assisting others to implement the `Green Key' Scheme (3)
Liaising with the public sector to promote sustainable tourism (2)
Co-ordination of `Green Holiday', a partnership of local councils promoting `Himmerland' as a `green'
tourist destination (1)
Industry/trade associations (n = 10):
Encouraging or assisting members to implement the `Green Key' scheme (5)
Employment of a countryside and environment consultant (2)
Involvement in `Blue Flag' scheme awarded to clean beaches or coastline (1)
Establishing environmental criteria for camp sites (1)
Assisting in development of environmentally friendly summer cottages (1)
Encouraging use of environmentally friendly buses (1)
Involvement in sustainable tourism projects (such as an energy saving campaign and an eco-labelling
project) (1)
Accommodation (n = 10):
Implementation of the `Green Key' scheme (5)
Implementing World Wide Fund for Nature environmental scheme for hotels (21 criteria, of which three
must be ful®lled each year) (2)
Reduction of energy consumption (2)
Introduced environmentally friendly summer cottages (2)
Employee training in environmental issues (1)
Involvement in establishing code of conduct for the sector (1)
Attractions (n = 8):
Reduction of energy consumption, use of solar energy, savings on packaging, water and waste
management (4)
Environmental reporting and auditing (1)
Establishment of an environmental department (1)
An environmental certi®cate (1)
Transport and tour operations (n = 9):
Use of less polluting fuel, monitoring fuel emissions, managing sea waste (4)
Encouraging sustainable tourism at destinations through agreements with local service providers (3)
Environmental reporting and auditing (2)
Recycling paper and brochures, management of waste and water (2)
Promoting `green' holidays in brochures (1)

during visits that are carried out about once a
year (Green Key, 1995, 1998). Another encour-
agement mentioned by 13 respondents was
®nancial support from public funds to com-
pensate businesses for the extra costs often
involved when introducing sustainable prac-
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
tices or to reward businesses that take the lead
in these practices. Several people, notably in
the accommodation sector, considered the
industry would be better placed to respond
to sustainable tourism initiatives if the govern-
ment took greater interest in the industry and
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
 Table 2. Perceived main incentives to the adoption of sustainable tourism practices
98

Responses by sector

Regional Local
tourism destination Industry/trade Transport and
associations agencies associations Accommodation Attractions tour operations Total
Perceived main incentives (5) (5) (10) (10) (8) (9) (47)
Increasing customer awareness 1 3 7 5 2 2 20
and demand
Cost savings 3 1 2 7 2 1 16
Ethical stance of the organisation 3 ± 4 5 2 2 16
Obtain a marketing advantage/ 2 1 3 2 2 2 13
improve image

Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Wish to be seen to be involved ± ± 1 1 2 2 6
in `green' trends
Under pressure from regulations 1 ± 1 ± 1 3 6
To avoid new regulations 1 ± ± ± ± ± 1
To support local communities ± 1 ± ± ± ± 1

Table 3. Perceived main obstacles to the adoption of sustainable tourism practices

Responses by sector

Regional Local
tourism destination Industry/trade Transport and
associations agencies associations Accommodation Attractions tour operations Total
Perceived main obstacles (5) (5) (10) (10) (8) (9) (47)
High investment costs involved 3 2 6 5 3 6 25
Unfavourable tax position of the 1 5 3 3 2 1 15
industry
Negative attitudes or lack of 3 1 1 ± 1 1 7
knowledge in the industry
Practical dif®culties (such as the need ± ± 1 2 2 ± 5
to educate employees and increased
administration demands)
Limited commitment from the local ± 1 2 2 ± ± 5
authorities
Sustainable tourism is hard to de®ne 1 ± ± ± ± ± 1
or may be too theoretical

Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)

B. Bramwell and L. Alletorp
 Table 4. External assistance considered most helpful to encourage the adoption of sustainable tourism practices

Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Responses by sector

Regional Local
tourism destination Industry/trade Transport and
associations agencies associations Accommodation Attractions tour operations Total
Type of external assistance (5) (5) (10) (10) (8) (9) (47)
Business and Government Roles in Sustainable Tourism

Expert assistance/advice from a 3 2 6 5 2 4 22

consultant
Financial support from public funds 1 2 5 3 2 ± 13
Greater government interest in the ± 1 2 4 1 ± 8
industry and change to its tax
position
No need for external assistance 1 ± ± ± 3 5 9

Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)

99
100
Table 5. Whether there should be more government regulations to encourage the adoption of sustainable
tourism practices
No need for
more government
Respondents by sector regulations
Regional tourism associations
Local destination agencies
Industry/trade associations
Accommodation
Attractions
Transport and tour operations
Total
a
One respondent did not know.
changed its unfavourable tax position. Five
respondents in transport and tour operations,
three in the attractions sector and one in a local
destination agency stated that their organisa-
tion already had access to suf®cient expertise
and thus did not require further external
assistance. For example, some larger com-
panies had their own environmental staff
and some organisations already employed
an environmental consultant.
Table 5 shows responses to a question about
whether there ought to be more government
regulations to encourage the adoption of
sustainable tourism practices. Although 15 of
those questioned stated that there was a need
for more such regulations, as many as 31
indicated that there was no need. Interviewees
in industry associations and the attractions
sector were particularly likely to oppose more
government regulations, calling instead for a
voluntary approach backed up with advice
and support mechanisms. By contrast, there
was a much more varied response to this
question among respondents in the other
sectors.
Responses to a question about where prime
responsibility should lie for initiating sustain-
able tourism practices are presented in Table 6.
The majority of those questioned considered
that prime responsibility lies with the tourism
industry (including trade associations) (41.3%)
or else with the tourism industry in partner-
ship with the government (a further 41.3%).
Only 17.4% stated that the prime responsibility
should lie with the government alone. Some
respondents commented that the government
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
B. Bramwell and L. Alletorp
Need for
more government
regulations Total responses
3 2 5
3 2 5
9 1 10
5 5 10
7 1 8
4 4 8a
31 15 46
could not be expected to take prime responsi-
bility because currently it showed little interest
in the industry's well being. However, other
respondents suggested there ought be a
partnership between the industry and govern-
ment because the competitive environment
and need to make a pro®t mean that there are
limits to what the industry on its own can
achieve. Another argument used in support of
a partnership approach was that the govern-
ment could provide the legislative framework
while the industry has the best knowledge of
the market and of customer requirements.
CONCLUSION
Forsyth (1995, 1996, 1997) has also examined
attitudes in the tourism industry to who
should be responsible for implementing sus-
tainable tourism. Based on a survey of 69
companies or institutions in the UK outgoing
tourism industry, he found that as many as
63.8% considered that responsibility lies with
government, 30.4% with tourism operators and
also host governments, and only 5.8% with
tourism operators (including trade associa-
tions). The present survey of senior managers
in the Danish industry dealing with tourists in
Denmark suggests that comparatively larger
proportions considered that prime responsi-
bility rests with the industry or else with the
industry working alongside the government.
These differences between the two studies may
be due to the relatively higher level of concern
about environmental issues in Denmark, pos-
sibly resulting in more demand among the
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
Business and Government Roles in Sustainable Tourism 101

Table 6. Where prime responsibility should lie for initiating sustainable tourism practices
Prime responsibility lies with

The tourism Both the tourism

industry (including industry and the Total
Respondents by sector trade associations) government The government responses
Regional tourism 2 3 ± 5
associations
Local destination agencies 1 3 1 5
Industry/trade associations 6 3 ± 9a
Accommodation 2 3 5 10
Attractions 4 3 1 8
Transport and tour 4 4 1 9
operations
Total 19 19 8
Percentage of respondents 41.3 41.3 17.4
(N = 46a)
a
One respondent in a trade association stated that prime responsibility lies with the public at large.

industry's customers for sustainable tourism
practices. In addition, or alternatively, the
differences may re¯ect the incentive for the
Danish tourism businesses in the survey, being
located in the destinations visited by their
customers, to maintain the environmental and
cultural resources of their home areas.
Whereas these tourism businesses are likely
in the long term to be affected directly by the
adverse impacts of tourism on the destina-
tions, businesses taking visitors to other
countries (the outbound industry) can switch
destinations easily and quickly in response to
deterioration in the quality of a particular
destination. Hence, the outbound tourism
industry may conclude that the onus to take
a lead rests far more with the host govern-
ments in the countries concerned.
The present survey indicates that a number
of practices promoting sustainable tourism are
identi®ed by many in the Danish tourism
industry as potentially commercially advanta-
geous. Potential bene®ts being identi®ed in-
clude obtaining a marketing advantage and
cost savings. Although the ®ndings suggest
that the industry in Denmark is fairly receptive
to aspects of sustainable tourism, critics may
argue that current practices are largely super-
®cial, are sometimes aimed simply at cutting
costs, are not widespread, and that they are not
necessarily related to a coherent business
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
strategy or to a clear ethical stance. There is
also industry concern about the high invest-
ment costs that may be involved in introducing
sustainable tourism measures and also about
perceived constraints on the industry's ability
to fund the necessary investments owing to its
unfavourable tax position. Critics of industry
self-regulation for sustainable tourism might
also contend that progress in Denmark is
actually very limited given the relatively high
levels of concern about the environment in the
country's main tourist markets.
Large numbers of the senior industry deci-
sion-makers in the present survey did not
favour more government regulations to en-
courage sustainable tourism. As many as
41.3% of these respondents saw the prime
responsibility for initiating sustainable tour-
ism as lying with both the industry and
government. This latter ®nding provides some
support for the advocates of partnerships for
sustainable tourism between businesses, trade
associations, governments and possibly local
communities involved in tourism develop-
ment.
Sustainable tourism in destinations might be
advanced through co-ordination and recogni-
tion of mutual long-term interests between the
providers of the many tourism products,
including the public sector, which is likely to
play an important co-ordinating function for
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
102
the destination's tourism management. The
quality of tourism resources may be recog-
nised as a shared or common interest for the
numerous tourism-related organisations based
in a destination. An integrated, proactive
partnership approach to environmental and
community management in destinations may
help to develop competitive advantage by
maintaining destination quality, and this qual-
ity can be marketed to differentiate destina-
tions from their competitors (Welford and
Gouldson, 1993). As a result of the implemen-
tation of such an approach, the destination can
be promoted as a `green destination' and local
tourism businesses may be able to take
advantage of this environmental label. The
destination scale is the focus for a sustainable
tourism project Ð Destination 21 Ð currently
being developed in Denmark. This project
involves the `eco-labelling' of destinations that
provide speci®ed environmental standards in
their tourism planning and provision, and also
respect local cultures and communities living
in the destination. It is expected that the
development of tourism in destinations in
Denmark gaining the eco-label will be based
on partnerships involving representatives of
several stakeholder groups.
REFERENCES
Aderhold, P, Teigland, J, Steene, A, Koskinen, J.
1993. Tourism in Scandinavia. In Tourism in
Europe. Structures and Developments, Pompl, W,
Lavery, P (eds). CAB International: Wallingford;
185±201.
Association of Attractions in Denmark. 1998. List of
Members, 1998. Association of Attractions in
Denmark: Nykobing Mors.
Association of Danish Travel Agents and Tour
Operators. 1998. Membership Roster, 1998. Asso-
ciation of Danish Travel Agents and Tour
Operators: Copenhagen.
Association of Danish Youth Hostels. 1998. List of
Members, 1998. DANHOSTEL: Copenhagen.
Association of the Hotel, Restaurant and Tourism
Industry in Denmark. 1997. List of Members,
October 1997. HORESTA: Copenhagen.
Berry, S, Ladkin, A. 1997. Sustainable tourism: a
regional perspective, Tourism Management 18 (7):
433±440.
Bramwell, B. 1998. Selecting policy instruments for
sustainable tourism, In Global Tourism, Theobald,
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
B. Bramwell and L. Alletorp
WF (ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford; 361±
379.
Brown, M. 1994. Environmental auditing and the
hotel industry: an accountant's perspective. In
Tourism. The State of the Art, Seaton, AV (ed.).
Wiley: Chichester; 675±681.
Buhalis, D, Fletcher, J. 1995. Environmental impacts
on tourist destinations: an economic analysis. In
Sustainable Tourism Development, Coccossis, H,
Nijkamp, P (eds). Avebury: Aldershot; 3±24.
Cannon, T. 1994. Corporate Responsibility. A Textbook
on Business Ethics, Governance, Environment: Roles
and Responsibilities. Pitman: London.
Christensen, PF, Faurholdt, S. 1998. Press Release
July 1998. Pinsepakkeforlig mod Turisterhvervets
Onsker. Turismens Foellesrad ± Nyhedsbrev.
Joint Council of the Danish Tourism Trade:
Copenhagen.
Danish Camping Board. 1998. Book of Members,
1998. Danish Camping Board: Copenhagen.
Danish Holiday Cottage Rental Association. 1998.
List of Members, 1998. Danish Holiday Cottage
Rental Association: Copenhagen.
Danish Tourist Board. 1997. Tourism Organisations,
1997/98. Danish Tourist Board: Copenhagen.
DTDC. 1998. The Danish Tourism Development
Centre Ð A Corporate Pro®le. Danish Tourism
Development Centre: Copenhagen.
Field, BC. 1994. Environmental Economics. An Intro-
duction. McGraw-Hill: New York.
Forsyth, T. 1995. Business attitudes to sustainable
tourism: self-regulation in the UK outgoing
tourism industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 3
(4): 210±231.
Forsyth, T. 1996. Sustainable Tourism. Moving from
Theory to Practice. A Report for Tourism Concern.
World Wide Fund for Nature: Godalming.
Forsyth, T. 1997. Environmental responsibility and
business regulation: the case of sustainable
tourism. The Geographical Journal 163 (3): 270±280.
Forsyth, P, Dwyer, L, Clarke, H. 1995. Problems in
the use of economic instruments to reduce
adverse environmental impacts of tourism. Tour-
ism Economics 1 (3): 265±282.
Godfrey, KB. 1998. Attitudes towards `sustainable
tourism' in the UK: a view from local govern-
ment. Tourism Management 19 (3): 213±224.
Goodall, B. 1995. Environmental auditing: a tool for
assessing the environmental performance of
tourism ®rms. The Geographical Journal 161 (1):
29±37.
Green Key. 1995. The Green Key. Lea¯et. The Green
Key: Copenhagen.
Green Key. 1998. The Green Key. Lea¯et. The Green
Key: Copenhagen.
Hjalager, A-M. 1996. Tourism and the environment:
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)
Business and Government Roles in Sustainable Tourism
the innovation connection. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism 4 (4): 201±218.
Horobin, H, Long, J. 1996. Sustainable tourism: the
role of the small ®rm. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management 8 (5): 15±19.
Hunter, C, Green, H. 1995. Tourism and the En-
vironment. A Sustainable Relationship? Routledge:
London.
Jacobs, M. 1991. The Green Economy. Environment,
Sustainable Development and the Politics of the
Future. Pluto Press: London.
Joint Council of the Danish Tourism Trade. 1998.
List of Members, 1998. Joint Council of the Danish
Tourism Trade: Copenhagen.
King, B, Weaver, S. 1993. The impact of the
environment on the Fiji tourism industry: a study
of industry attitudes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism
1 (2): 97±111.
Kirk, D. 1998. Attitudes to environmental manage-
ment held by a group of hotel managers in
Edinburgh. International Journal of Hospitality
Management 17 (1): 33±47.
Lin, Y-H, Hemmington, N. 1997. The impact of
environmental policy on the tourism industry in
Taiwan. Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Re-
search 3 (1): 35±45.
Middleton, VTC, Hawkins, R. 1998. Sustainable
Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
103
Tourism. A Marketing Perspective. Butterworth-
Heinemann: Oxford.
Ministry of Business and Industry. 1994. Guidelines
for the Tourism Network. Establishment of
Regional Tourism Associations and the National
Network. Ministry of Business and Industry:
Copenhagen.
Nijkamp, P, Verdonkschot, P. 1995. Sustainable
tourism development: a case study of Lesbos. In
Sustainable Tourism Development, Coccossis, H,
Nijkamp, P, (eds). Avebury: Aldershot; 127±140.
OECD. 1996. Tourism Policy and International
Tourism in OECD Countries 1993±94. OECD:
Paris.
Peattie, K. 1992. Green Marketing. Pitman: London.
Peattie, K. 1995. Environmental Marketing Manage-
ment. Meeting the Green Challenge. Pitman:
London.
Stabler, MJ, Goodall, B. 1997. Environmental aware-
ness, action and performance in the Guernsey
hospitality sector. Tourism Management 18 (1):
19±33.
Welford, R, Gouldson, A. 1993. Environmental
Management and Business Strategy. Pitman:
London.
Weston, C. 1996. Denmark. Travel and Tourism
Intelligence 4: 25±43.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 3, 91±103 (2001)