Access to Nature for Persons with Disabilities: Perspectives and Practices of Swedish Tourism Providers

ABSTRACT

Despite the growing popularity of outdoor recreation, nature is not equally accessible to everyone. In the case of persons with disabilities, access to nature remains a largely under-researched area, especially in terms of the role of private and public providers of products and facilities for a diverse range of visitors. This study investigates the challenges and opportunities for developing inclusive forms of accessible nature-based tourism in three different natural settings in Sweden. By focusing on the supply side of nature-based tourism, we examine views and practices in providing inclusive activities and environments. Despite growing stakeholder interest in accessible nature-based tourism, our findings reveal several challenges, including limited knowledge about the consumers, lack of financial resources and long-term planning, and the absence of a holistic accessibility perspective. We discuss these challenges and propose that they can be collectively met through increased stakeholder collaboration for creating accessible nature-based tourism.

KEYWORDS:

• Accessible nature-based tourism
• destination management
• outdoor recreation
• private-public collaboration
• protected areas
• tourism companies

Introduction

Tourism’s diversity stems, among others, from its association with a broad range of natural and cultural milieus. It also relates to the multitude of stakeholders involved in tourism’s production both as an activity that facilitates movement between origins and destinations and within destinations themselves. Unfortunately, these elements rarely dovetail with the needs of persons with disabilities for an accessible tourism-related environment, while barriers to such an environment are omnipresent in society (Darcy & Buhalis, 2011). Recently, academics have called for more active scientific research relating to the needs of persons with disabilities while traveling (Darcy et al., 2020; Gillovic & McIntosh, 2020; Zhang et al., 2017). Individuals with various forms of permanent or temporary disability often face obstacles in participating in certain types of tourism-related activities, especially many of those that are nature-based. In Sweden, whereas the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) highlights the importance of engaging in outdoor recreation in natural environmental settings in terms of people’s health and well-being, it also indicates that several barriers in nature-based tourism, including inadequate infrastructure and absence of clear information, reduce accessibility to certain natural areas (SEPA, 2015). In this paper, although these are not identical, we use the terms nature-based tourism, outdoor recreation, and nature experiences interchangeably to include a variety of recreational, nature-based activities.

While disability policies in many countries date back over several decades (see Scotch, 2000) it has remained particularly challenging for both public authorities and private actors to transform various visitor-related environments but also products and services to meet the needs of persons with disabilities. Within natural settings, for example, it is common that certain areas remain especially hard to access because of remoteness and their rugged topography. Moreover, in several countries, nature conservation efforts aimed at protecting sensitive areas like wilderness sites or national parks often purposely seek to limit public infrastructure (e.g. paved surfaces) to a minimum to avoid disturbing, as much as possible, the natural resources (Donlon, 2000; Godtman Kling, 2021; Mebus et al., 2013). While it is common in both natural and cultural areas, including hiking (Nisbett & Hinton, 2005) and heritage sites (Evcil, 2018), to strictly control the development of infrastructure so as to protect sensitive areas, such actions may limit access to certain individuals, including those with disabilities (Veitch & Shaw, 2011).

We should add that societal attitudes, including misconceptions about the ability levels of persons with disabilities, regularly create barriers to travel and tourism for individuals (Darcy & Buhalis, 2011; McKercher & Darcy, 2018; Scheyvens & Biddulph, 2018; Yau et al., 2004). Indeed, the tourism industry itself performs poorly in terms of identifying and accommodating the specific demands and preferences of individuals facing disabilities (Bianchi et al., 2020; Cockburn-Wootten & McIntosh, 2020). For example, it is common for suppliers of tourism services and products (e.g. transport companies, outfitters, guides) to be driven by preconceptions and prejudices about what persons with disabilities can or cannot do. This, in turn, leads many tourism companies to unnecessarily discourage persons from participating in various activities because of reasons like liability fears in case of accidents (Burns et al., 2013; 2009; Nisbett & Hinton, 2005). In their study of an adapted paddling program, Merrick et al. (2020) discovered that some participants felt restricted by the rules of the program resulting from risk management strategies and insurance policies since these prevented them from challenging themselves.

Here, we explore both the opportunities and the challenges of developing more inclusive forms of accessible nature-based tourism. We focus primarily on identifying promising practices on the part of both private and public stakeholders who provide products, services, and facilities for tourists with physical disabilities who wish to access and experience natural settings. To explore these issues, we focus on three different natural settings in various parts of Sweden. This allows us to capture and account for diverse geographical contingencies. The overriding question we seek to answer is: what possibilities exist for developing accessible nature-based tourism and what challenges inhibit this ambition? Several additional questions help us guide this research: (a) to what extent do private businesses, NGOs in the outdoor recreation field, non-profit associations, interest organizations for persons with disabilities, and public authorities seek to address the issue of accessible tourism in natural environments; (b) when they do engage in accessibility-related issues, what steps do these stakeholders take to ensure achievements; and (c) how do these different actors interact and collaborate?

In the rest of this paper, we first review existing research on accessible tourism and nature-based tourism. Then, we present how we conducted qualitative interviews and fieldwork in our case study areas and, finally, we report our results. We end with a discussion and conclusions.

Accessible tourism for persons with disabilities

This study focuses on accessible nature-based tourism. Nevertheless, there is a need to highlight the development of accessible tourism as a research topic in its own right, since this comprehensive concept is fundamental to understanding all sub-segments of tourism for persons with disabilities.

Scientific studies relating to the links between persons with disabilities and tourism have increased in recent years. A search of the Scopus database conducted in 2019 revealed 342 articles, book chapters and conference proceedings dealing with this topic, of which 244 were published between 2010 and 2019 (Godtman Kling & Ioannides, 2019). The growing interest in this research area stems from the enhanced overall acceptance of disability as a bona fide study topic in academe, especially following Michael Oliver’s publication of The Politics of Disablement in 1990 (see also Oliver & Barnes, 2012). Moreover, voices have increasingly being raised to draw critical attention to the exclusive nature of tourism, where both the production and consumption of tourism is restricted to privileged groups in society (Boluk et al., 2019; Jamal & Camargo, 2014; Scheyvens & Biddulph, 2018). Although tourism is described as a “social force” (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2006, p. 1193) with the potential to contribute to global justice and equal opportunities through increased awareness, interconnectedness, and contact between people from different societal groups, its unprecedented growth is still mainly reserved for the relatively few with the resources and ability to travel (Gibson, 2009; Higgins-Desbiolles et al., 2019). Persons with disabilities have, thus, remained marginalized in tourism settings. Fortunately, there are signs that things may be changing through calls for an inclusive tourism development together with pressure from disability rights’ activists. These highlight the need to recognize that accessibility should be an integral part in all aspects of tourism (Darcy et al., 2020; Gillovic & McIntosh, 2020).

Generally, scholars refer to accessible tourism when conceptualizing the necessary arrangements for making travel, tourism and commercial recreational activities socially inclusive for persons with disabilities (Darcy & Buhalis, 2011). Especially, they pay attention to the obstacles that hinder persons from participating in various tourism activities (Eichhorn & Buhalis, 2011). For instance, inadequate physical access can deter persons with various disabilities from visiting and enjoying certain attractions and using different services and facilities (see also Darcy, 2010). Stumbo and Pegg (2005) argue that the accessibility between facilities, events, attractions and accommodations has not been thoroughly examined from the point of tourism planning and development. Furthermore, the attitudinal barriers, especially the negative views that persons without disabilities and society-at-large have towards those with disabilities, often lead to misperceptions and can cause poor accessibility (Daruwalla & Darcy, 2005). Inadequate information can also accentuate the problems for persons with disabilities who wish to go on holiday. When a travel agency is unable to provide information about whether or not accessibility is available at a particular destination, this can cause major problems for persons with disabilities (Wright, 2012). It is, therefore, essential that all stakeholders involved in promoting and offering tourism products to particular destinations should collaborate and communicate in the development of accessible tourism. Effective operationalization of stakeholder collaboration can lead to consistent and continuous information about a destination’s accessibility levels. In turn, these elements should be presented in formats addressing different types of disabilities (Nyanjom et al., 2018).

Studies relating to tourism accessibility for persons with disabilities focus mostly on the consumer perspective (Godtman Kling & Ioannides, 2019). Mainly, these are investigations concerning the preferences and demands of persons with disabilities and their accompanying family members when choosing products like transport and accommodation (Chang & Chen, 2012; Darcy, 2010). They tend to outline various needs for accessible travel among tourists with disabilities and investigate their criteria when selecting accessible tourism facilities and services. Meanwhile, although certain researchers interested in accessible tourism focus on the identification of best practices, accessible tourism from the providers’ viewpoint remains relatively under-researched (Bowtell, 2015; Godtman Kling & Ioannides, 2019; Nicolaisen et al., 2012). Investigating what private businesses, organizations and public authorities have to say about accessible tourism in natural environments led us to the social model of disability, which basically promotes the notion that society itself is blameworthy for the discrimination towards persons with disabilities (e.g. Tregaskis, 2004; Zajadacz, 2015). This results from the overwhelming tendency historically to develop facilities and infrastructure with the able-bodied population in mind and to treat accessible facilities as an afterthought (Oliver & Barnes, 2012). While Tregaskis (2004) views the realization of this problem as a positive move, she believes it does not go far enough. She maintains that the best way to deal with the exclusion of persons with disabilities in many societal aspects is to embrace a socially inclusive approach, where persons with disabilities are an integral part of the design, planning, construction, and evaluation of accessibility initiatives. In the context of making tourism accessible to all, Zajadacz (2015) argues that the social model of disability rejects that accessible tourism is solely a demand-side idea. Rather, it also implies a certain responsibility for the tourism supply-side to create conditions that enable full participation for persons with disabilities. Thus, accessible tourism is viewed as a joint force that requires equal efforts from all involved stakeholders.

Accessible nature-based tourism

When it comes to nature-based tourism, the issue of accessible tourism for persons with disabilities remains largely under-researched (Godtman Kling & Ioannides, 2019). This is surprising considering nature-based tourism’s growing popularity as one of the fastest-growing tourism types (Newsome et al., 2013; Wolf et al., 2019). Several authors have called for more studies to better understand the issue of accessible tourism in natural settings. There is also a need to better understand the obstacles that persons with disabilities face when seeking to access such places (Burns et al., 2009; Chikuta et al., 2019). Evidently, insufficient accessibility measures within natural areas and inaccessible transport to and from these places are barriers, which many persons with disabilities are unable to overcome, thus reducing their participation in nature-based activities (Crosbie, 2016; Menzies et al., 2021). However, social constraints can be equally inhibiting for persons with disabilities. Seeing persons without disabilities hiking along an unpaved trail they cannot access may make persons with disabilities feel excluded, while the fear of being stared at and not fitting into the norm of an “outdoorsy” person can prevent people from even visiting natural areas (Burns et al., 2013; Corazon et al., 2019). Based on observations such as these, it is thus important to note that constraints to nature activities participation can be a complex interplay between structural, intrapersonal, and interpersonal barriers (McKercher & Darcy, 2018), since disabling environments and exclusive social perceptions about what persons with disabilities can and cannot do can cause persons with disabilities to risk losing the health and wellbeing benefits of nature-based settings.

Applying the aforementioned social model to nature-based contexts is especially relevant since, rather than blaming poor access to certain areas on the persons with disabilities, the focus shifts towards understanding how various stakeholders, including planners, managers, nature-based tourism companies and persons with disabilities, can work together to improve accessibility for everyone. Unfortunately, the suppliers of tourism experiences, including the managers of nature areas, tend to assume that many activities in the outdoors are too risky for persons with disabilities, ignoring that many such individuals are actually quite capable to participate in several activities (Burns et al., 2009). In other words, it is common to lump all persons with disabilities into a single group, assuming they are all equally limited in what they can achieve while being outdoors in nature. This, in turn, leads to myopic approaches where dedicated facilities for persons with disabilities focus narrowly on safety, providing only a small taste of the overall experience of the natural setting (e.g. a wheelchair accessible path so that persons with disabilities can “sample” the destination). This can cause what Tregaskis (2004, p. 607) terms “apartheid in facility provision” since persons with disabilities and those who accompany them, might be unable to access the main attraction of the natural area (Nyman et al., 2018).

We must also recognize that many persons with disabilities also prefer natural environments to remain as “original” as possible, meaning that these should not be altered for accessibility purposes. In other words, just like many persons without disabilities, these individuals prefer such areas to remain “wild” and challenging (Brown et al., 1999; McAvoy et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2017). Corazon et al. (2019), for example, suggest that accessible infrastructure in natural areas (e.g. broad concrete paths) can paradoxically distance users from feeling closely connected to nature. This, in turn, highlights the importance of including the target group (e.g. persons with disabilities) in the design process before investing in the construction of accessible infrastructure.

Material and method

For our research, we conducted a collective case study. Specifically, while a collective case study embraces one chosen issue or concern, the researcher selects multiple cases to illustrate the problem (Bryman, 2008; Creswell, 2013). We selected three distinct types of Swedish natural settings to capture diverse nature-based activities (water-based activities and those in forests and mountains). Although the chosen locations are sparsely populated, they are ones where outdoor recreation and nature-based activities are prominent (Figure 1). In these areas, we examine how private and public stakeholders experience possibilities and challenges relating to accessible nature-based tourism. In each study area, we conducted interviews to gain insights on what the stakeholders had to say about these issues.

Figure 1. Map of Sweden and the case study areas. Map from iStockphoto. Map of the Nordic countries where each of the three the case study areas in Sweden are highlighted with a rectangle.

First, we conducted interviews and fieldwork in the mountains of Jämtland, a popular tourist destination located about 500 km northwest of Stockholm. The mountains are heavily marketed for their nature-based activities in protected areas, as well as in tourist resorts, and around second homes (e.g. hiking, fishing, cycling, and skiing). Second, we focused on the Stockholm archipelago, where few islands are permanently inhabited but several offer a large share of second homes and water-based tourism activities during summer. Last, to capture recreational activities in forests and lakes, we collected data in Askersund municipality, including the national park Tiveden. This region, located 250 km southwest of Stockholm, focuses on nature and culture experiences, while boating in one of the largest lakes in Sweden (Lake Vättern) is popular.

By conducting an online search of businesses in each of the case areas, we selected a total of fifteen tourist companies. We searched for companies, which advertised that they customize activities to suit all guests’ preferences. We also wanted a wide range of activities in different geographical settings. Additionally, we studied the contributions that relevant public sector institutions can make within the case areas. Thus, we also conducted interviews with fifteen representatives from municipal councils, and regional county authorities, and one from SEPA. Further, we interviewed representatives of one destination management organization (DMO), one local fishing association, three different NGOs within the field of outdoor recreation and nature-based tourism, and two non-profit associations that offer kayaking and downhill skiing respectively. We also interviewed one representative from an interest organization for persons with disabilities. The sample was based on the interviewees’ professional role working with nature-based tourism, accessibility, or planning and management of protected areas. All study participants were fully informed about the purpose of the study, their participation was voluntary, and they could withdraw their consent to participate at any time. Their answers were treated confidentially. In total, 39 people were interviewed for this study (Table 1).

Table 1. Number of representatives interviewed.

	Stockholm Archipelago	Askersund and Tiveden N.P	Jämtland Mountains	National	Total
Tourism companies	4	6	5		15
Associations and organizations in tourism and/or outdoor recreation	3		4		7
Public sector: regional counties and local municipalities	5	4	6		15
Public sector: The Swedish Environmental Protected Agency (SEPA)				1	1
Interest organization for people with disabilities				1	1
Total	12	10	15	2	39

Interviews were conducted between October 2019 and August 2020. Most interviews (n = 30) were carried out face-to-face during fieldwork, eight occurred via digital platforms (Teams and Zoom), and one by phone. The interviews were semi-structured with open-ended questions, including ones on accessible tourism, suppliers’ perceived needs and challenges, experiences of how nature can be made accessible, and collaboration between different actors. The interviews, which lasted between 25 and 90 minutes, were conducted in Swedish by two of the authors, who are native speakers. The interviews were recorded while the interviewers also took notes during the discussion with the respondents. The material from all interviews was later transcribed.

We analyzed and interpreted the collected data through thematic analysis (Tashakkori et al., 2021). First, we read and re-read the interview transcripts. To detect patterns and emerging themes in the data material, sections where the respondents talked about possibilities and challenges in developing accessible nature-based tourism were highlighted. Also, we noted and analyzed various kinds of interaction and collaboration efforts between different stakeholders.

Results

Growing interest but lack of knowledge

In all case areas, there was a great interest among tourism companies to encourage more persons with disabilities to participate in nature-based tourism and outdoor experiences overall. However, we also recognized through the interviews that the companies were quite uncertain as to how to reach the consumer market and how to develop accessible tourism products. Many tourism companies reflected a growing interest in developing accessible tourism, providing examples of facilities and adjustments in their respective natural settings. They talked about nature guiding on gravel paths and built wooden ramps near parking lots to reach viewpoints and other attractions. They also referred to jetties with ramps for fishing as well as boating/canoeing, sport fishing, snorkelling tours with tactile signs, reconstructed boats (increased space and better embarking) for sightseeing and transportation to protected areas, snowmobile rides, skiing, and dogsledding. Several respondents mentioned accessible toilets, fireplaces, and picnic areas. They spoke about nature guides who address the various senses of their tour participants (e.g. touch, smell, sight and sound) and about digital information, on-site signs, tactile maps, and sound boxes (pre-recorded information about the site) as part of the accessible tourism supply in nature.

Only a handful of companies consider persons with disabilities and older adults (pensioners) to be important target groups. Nevertheless, most of these companies do not have a ready-made product to offer, creating instead a tailor-made product when a specific request arises. Several only began offering accessible tourism products following requests from guests for a specific activity in nature (e.g. for a family member using a wheelchair). The representative from a tourism destination organization said that although it is important to work with accessible tourism, they do not consider persons with disabilities as a distinct segment or target group:

I do not believe in marketing ourselves as a destination for people with disabilities, but rather talk about what we have and how we work. Talk about what we have in a way so that they can create their own perception of what they can or cannot do.

A small number of companies revealed that their arrangements at the destination have also proved attractive to other market segments, like older adults, families with young children, and inexperienced visitors. The owner of a boat company who runs trips in Lake Vättern to a nature reserve on one of the islands outside Askersund, mentioned that in 2006 they began making several modifications to their boat while also initiating a dialogue with the municipality and the county administrative board about making adjustments in the nature reserve. This resulted in wooden ramps, fishing jetties, and picnic areas adapted for wheelchairs in the nature reserve. This specific company now sees significant demand regarding accessible tourism.

The first year we had not marketed ourselves. During the first year, / … / we had about 110 visitors [in wheelchair]. The lift and our investment were paid back very quickly. I think the best marketing is word of mouth. Often when you think of accessibility, you think of wheelchairs. We have learned that there are many other disabilities as well. It is also for families with prams/ … /. You have to think outside the box.

In the Jämtland mountains, we interviewed a non-profit association, whose main target group are persons with reduced mobility. This association offers a ski school using, for example, sit skis and ski carts. The association collaborates with the ski destination and businesses within the accommodation and transportation sectors so that persons with reduced mobility can take part in their ski school during holiday. The representative from the ski school mentioned that the school is always fully booked, while demand is increasing. Another case where the interviewee experienced a high demand for the company’s services was revealed by a nature guide in the Stockholm area who focuses on nature experiences for persons with different disabilities. He said this about the demand for accessible activities:

The demand is great, but the problem is that many do not dare to go out. It is very important for many to get good information before going out. Information varies greatly across the country. That's a huge problem. If you get good information about different areas, then I think that many more will come out much easier.

However, it emerged from our interviews that most business owners experience a low demand for accessible nature-based activities and are uncertain about what efforts and resources are required to change their business and activities to cater to persons with disabilities.

A common theme appearing in many interviews was that tourism businesses highlighted their lack of knowledge while calling for greater support on how to develop their businesses and attract persons with disabilities. Similarly, several organizations and authorities also ask for more knowledge about how they can become more inclusive for persons with disabilities. For example, interviewees are often ignorant about what the demand for accessible tourism looks like and to what extent adjustments in their offerings should be made. Notably, as some entrepreneurs point out, the sense of adventure should not disappear from their products, and major adjustments are often unnecessary. One leader from an association for persons with disabilities explains that when escorting people on kayaking or other excursions in the Stockholm archipelago, customers may react negatively if the natural environment is adapted to an extent where the sense of adventure and the overall experience is lost.

Financial constraints, land ownership, and planning issues

As is often the case, especially among smaller businesses, several of our interviewees face clear financial and budgetary constraints if they are to transform tourism experiences in nature-based areas into more accessible offerings. Meanwhile, uncertainties about the level of demand for such services add to these constraints. The representative of one tourism company offering kayaking among other activities indicated that “very special adaptations are required to improve accessibility”. This can prove significantly challenging due to the costs involved. This is also a problem that associations and public authorities must deal with. When asked, “what are the biggest needs and challenges”, a municipal representative’s answer reflected what several other interviewees repeated:

Financing. That's the big question. I am convinced that if we were to seek funding to adapt certain trails, we could get that. It is the operation and maintenance, the long-term perspective as a whole, the long-term financing./ … / I am quite convinced that there will be no money from the municipality to do so. Here you have to find new innovative funding solutions.

Interviewees from several organizations and public authorities, claim that a major challenge they regularly encounter is that they have short budget cycles (resources are allocated annually). These include the government budget affecting regional and local authorities, or organizations that must also apply for grants to subsidize many of their activities. This means that these organizations are trapped in a vicious circle of spending much of their time and energy chasing funds to subsidize many of their activities instead of focusing on objectives and strategies, like working towards long-term and sustainable solutions for their destination. In turn, this means that resources rarely are available to address important issues like working towards the development of accessible nature-based tourism. A county representative working with outdoor recreation issues states that built facilities have high costs in long-term maintenance, meaning they have only a limited number of ramps, prepared trails, and rest areas. He believes that in the future they must look more towards the natural conditions of the locations and “how we can make these locations available with small means, sometimes it may be enough to inform about the places”. He continues, self-critically in relation to the web information on Tiveden National Park, that information should not only tell the visitor that the park is accessible “but how it is accessible”. Ultimately, he says, “it is also about the fact that we need to have better contact with people with disabilities and with organizations in order to gain knowledge about what kind of accessibility is needed”.

Yet another matter relating to financial issues highlighted by several interviewees was their awareness that many persons with disabilities are on a fixed budget and lack the resources to go on holiday, let alone participate in various activities. Thus, even if activities and resources for accessible tourism are available, not everybody can take advantage of these. This situation, in turn, contributes to uncertainty among various stakeholders, especially the private companies. Several entrepreneurs struggle to calculate the costs and benefits of investing in various initiatives to create accessible travel experiences for persons with disabilities, especially if their efforts lead to minimal demand. One interviewee from a tourist company expressed this concern in this way:

I do not know what the willingness to pay looks like among people with disabilities. / … / you have to find a guest who is willing to pay for experiences / … / a lot is probably due to the fact that Swedes in general are not used to pay for nature experiences. [due to the Public Right of Access]

Interestingly, some interviewees reflected that natural settings rarely constitute a commercial product when thinking about nature experiences. In Sweden this becomes particularly relevant due to the long tradition of access to the common outdoors and the Public Right of Access, which allows recreational activities on private property without requesting the landowner’s permission. Access to the countryside has been fundamental for the development of outdoor recreation and nature-based tourism, and Fredman et al. (2012) showed that the nature-based tourism sector benefits from the open access regime. Based on the interviewees’ reasoning we can ask: Who wants, who can and who should develop accessibility in areas that are privately owned? Who, indeed, owns the question?

Some respondents addressed land ownership in the interviews. This was especially an issue among those in the Stockholm archipelago region. One interviewed guide in the archipelago explained that making nature more accessible is highly problematic. Since one must deal with many private landowners whose land the tour traverses, it is difficult to put in substantial efforts for improving accessibility on their properties in the case, for example, of jetties and other facilities for boats, as well as gravel paths and built wooden ramps. Developing accessible tourism depends on whether the landowners want tourists in the area, a fact that was also emphasized by a municipal representative in Stockholm who works with outdoor recreation issues. This person noted that landowners view the beach on their properties as belonging only to them and object to its use by anyone else. One important thing to note here is the shoreline protection rules according to the Swedish Environmental Code, regulations that aim to secure public access to coastal areas and to preserve good conditions for biodiversity (SEPA, 2021). This is what the owner of a sport fishing company mentioned about challenges and landownership:

I try to create a dialogue with fishing associations and landowners in my immediate area, which could broaden my business by establishing contacts and collaborations with them. At present, many of these fishing associations are not interested in “tourist fishing” and letting in businesses, like mine, to make money on their waters.

Permission to build facilities in nature is a challenge both on private and public property. According to a destination manager who had applied for a permit on public owned land to build a wider trail for enhanced wheelchair accessibility, the state required the trail to be as narrow as possible to minimize environmental impacts. However, a narrow trail is problematic when walkers encounter a person using wheelchair. Different types of permit processes are perceived as obstacles by those we interviewed. One interviewee from a municipality mentioned they wanted to build a bird observation tower with a ramp to access the top. However, this did not happen because the tower would end up exceeding prescribed size limits, thus failing the shoreline protection rules and becoming ineligible for a building permit.

One challenge that tourism entrepreneurs in all study areas mention relates to water activities and the need for jetties to allow persons with reduced mobility to access boats. The challenge is associated both with construction permits and the need to find financing. The inability to develop ports and jetties, which safely allow embarkation on and disembarkation off boats, especially when a lifting device is necessary, becomes a huge obstacle for businesses.

Need for stakeholder collaboration and involvement of persons with disabilities

Among our interviewees, there appears to be a general desire for improved cooperation between private and public actors as well as interest organizations for persons with disabilities. Our interviews revealed that, currently, the degree of collaboration between actors is very low, although there is a desire to change this situation. The respondents were especially keen to stress the importance of using and sharing existing knowledge. One representative from the Stockholm County Administrative Board, who works with nature conservation issues, mentioned desired collaboration in this way. He believes that municipalities, state landowners, and managers of protected areas must collaborate, learn from each other, and exchange experiences, and perhaps even plan things together like how to coordinate information and reach out with communication about accessibility.

We can conclude from our interviews that tourism companies and associations working with outdoor activities can constitute knowledge nodes for authorities when the latter are working to enhance accessibility in the tourism sector, especially in natural areas. Concurrently, these authorities must play a supportive role in encouraging companies and associations to work more actively and efficiently towards enhancing accessibility. The companies that describe successful initiatives share in common the fact that they initially consulted member organizations for persons with disabilities or included persons who use wheelchairs. They also took the initiative to establish a collaboration with the municipality, county administrative board and landowners. Collaboration and networking are important for many companies and associations and can play a significant role in accessibility issues. In summary, private and public actors wish to cooperate more, and many believe there is much to be gained from increased collaboration. For instance, the owner of a tourism company, who believes that the development towards more accessible tourism must take place in collaboration between private companies and public authorities said:

It is the role of authorities and the public to create the conditions. If we are talking water, it would be good if there was, for example, a jetty where there is an opportunity to start something, then private actors must come up with initiatives.

We determine from the interviews that some municipalities see themselves as coordinators and, thus, take the initiative to gather different actors to, for example, undertake an inventory of available trails. Nevertheless, as one representative from a municipality stated, much more must be done other than just build ramps. Collaborations should also lead to addressing various disabilities and needs, like those of the visually impaired. An important factor to be addressed is the need to include persons with disabilities in decision-making processes. The SEPA representative emphasizes the need to collaborate more with interest organizations for persons with disabilities to ensure arrangements are correct from the beginning. However, this person also highlights the difficulties entailed in collaborating with non-profit organizations since the latter often lack the time and resources. The representative of an interest organization for persons with disabilities who pursues policies to create change for their members expressed that one way to develop accessibility is to have a co-creative process and identify who the non-users of a beach or a trail are. She continued, “once you have identified those groups, you should invite them and have a co-creative process where you take advantage of these experiences, and it can be developed into a new product”.

Several companies who have collaborated with interest organizations for persons with disabilities point out that, when there is an established collaboration, information about the company is spread more easily through different channels. The collaboration then leads to marketing of the company. Our interviews revealed that many tourism companies perceive information and marketing as challenging. In response to this, one guide in the Stockholm area highlighted that detailed online information would increase accessibility substantially (i.e. location of electric wheelchair chargers, detailed descriptions about distances, terrain, stairs and elevators, or whether there are toilets for persons with disabilities).

Discussion

This paper has added to the limited literature on the supply-side of accessible nature-based tourism by examining how private and public stakeholders view and practice this form of tourism. Our study reveals that the interest in accessible nature-based tourism for persons with physical disabilities among tourism businesses and public organizations is promising for tourism’s continued development. Nevertheless, there remain several challenges tourism providers face when attempting to include persons with disabilities in their product offering. These can be summarized in three categories: lack of knowledge about the consumers; limited financial resources; and absence of a holistic approach to accessibility. Up to now, in-depth knowledge about these challenges in the context of accessible tourism in natural settings has been scarce. We discuss the challenges below and propose that they can be collectively met through increased stakeholder collaboration, something that seems particularly important among nature-based tourism companies that operate in areas with different landowners and under the Public Right of Access regime.

Lack of knowledge about the consumers encompasses the importance of understanding visitor motives and needs, and how to reach persons with disabilities. Evidently, there exists considerable ignorance concerning the demand characteristics for accessible tourism and how to market nature experiences and activities. While it is true that tourism suppliers have done little to identify demands and preferences of persons with disabilities (Cockburn-Wootten & McIntosh, 2020; Michopoulou et al., 2015), we see signs—at least through an increased research interest—towards more inclusive tourism by making accessibility an integral part of the sector (Darcy et al., 2020; Gillovic & McIntosh, 2020; Godtman Kling & Ioannides, 2019). Even so, this interest has apparently not yet trickled down to the supply side of nature-based tourism, and many businesses remain uncertain as to how to adjust their offerings to cater to persons with disabilities. They only offer accessible products when a specific request arises, and consequently have difficulties in seeing long-term investments and costs. According to Garrod and Fennell (2021), such an ad hoc approach hinders businesses from successfully catering to the accessibility market. Nevertheless, companies can benefit from adopting a strategic approach towards addressing different requests from guests. Our own study reinforces this argument, since businesses with persons with disabilities as their primary customer segment are clearly better prepared to handle various requests, thus facilitating planning and decision-making for the company.

Our second concluding remark concerns the limited financial resources to develop and maintain high quality accessible infrastructure and, consequently, also difficulties in the planning process for both public and private stakeholders. Many companies find it hard to calculate the benefits and this, in turn, leads to hesitation or fear of investing. Such circumstances were noted in previous studies (Agovino et al., 2017; Gillovic & McIntosh, 2015), meaning that lack of financial support and cost-effective solutions constitute substantial difficulties for developing accessible nature-based tourism. Since many nature-based tourism companies are small with limited revenues, this further reinforces the perceived risk associated with investments. However, our findings suggest that the companies that risk the investment of money, time and effort to make their businesses more inclusive and succeed in targeting the accessible tourism market, experience increased numbers of visitors. These companies claim their investments have been paid off quickly and are profitable. This finding indicates a need for better support for the companies wishing to develop their activities.

A third category associated with challenges in developing accessible nature-based tourism concerns the absence of holistic approach to accessibility. By this, we mean several things, mostly relating to the necessity to conceptualize accessibility not as isolated efforts but as a holistic chain of elements where each component needs to be accessible. One key result in our research is the importance of regarding accessible nature-based tourism as a coherent sequence of activities. This is a point that has also been highlighted in previous studies (Groulx et al., 2021; Lane, 2007). It does not matter how accessible a tourism activity is, or how good the adjustments are in the natural area, if there are no accessible means of transportation, accommodation, or information.Previous studies (Fennell & Garrod, 2022; Stumbo & Pegg, 2005) have shown that one of the major challenges today is that tourism stakeholders do not prioritize accessibility issues in their operations, nor do they include persons with disabilities in their organizations. Neglecting to consult with persons with disabilities in the planning and implementation of tourism services goes against the core of the social model of disability, where all stakeholders share a responsibility for realizing accessible tourism. Further, this neglect ignores the fact that the social model of disability does not view the needs of persons with disabilities as special, but rather as one of many types of society’s needs (Zajadacz, 2015). These findings are reflected in our own investigation. Neglect leads to a situation where negative attitudes among the non-disabled about the abilities of persons with disabilities are allowed to continue, thus reinforcing the barriers to accessible tourism (Eichhorn & Buhalis, 2011). Further, we should note that since it is essential to accept that tourists with disabilities are just as heterogeneous as tourists without disabilities are, there is no “one size fits all” solution.

Related to the above comments, we strongly believe that stakeholder collaboration is necessary to create the holistic chain of accessible nature-based tourism. Increased collaboration between actors can raise awareness and enhance knowledge about this under-prioritized customer segment in accordance with the social model of disability. In turn, this can lead to a reduction or even total elimination of individual and societal prejudices concerning the participation of persons with disabilities in nature-based tourism. Collaborations with interest organizations and with persons with disabilities are necessary for developing accessible tourism. This finding corresponds to those by, for example, Nyanjom et al. (2018), and Nigg and Eichelberger (2021). Successful stakeholder collaboration can support not only international goals on the rights of people with disabilities (UN, 2022), and national goals on outdoor recreation participation and access to natural environments (SEPA, 2015), but also commercial goals as collaboration will facilitate marketing, adequate information, and tour packaging.

Additionally, collaboration between private and public stakeholders can generate innovative financing solutions where actors work strategically with each other and share costs. Funding accessibility initiatives is a major challenge for both public and private stakeholders. Several of our respondents, representing both private and public interests, are frustrated with the current situation that relates to short budget cycles and strict building permit and shoreline protection rules. This situation clearly inhibits the development of inclusive and accessible natural areas and activities, since these require consistent funding that enables well-structured maintenance, with responsibilities tied to a specific sector or person in the organization (Groulx et al., 2021).

Our interviewees revealed a confusion regarding who owns the question of developing accessible natural areas and a central component of stakeholder collaboration is clarity of roles and responsibilities with the involved stakeholder groups (Nyanjom et al., 2018). Nyanjom et al. (2018) suggest that the involvement of multiple stakeholders in promoting accessible tourism requires an organic, circulatory and developmental approach to collaboration, in order for produce innovative solutions. Such an approach is yet to be implemented in the cases we examined, and clearly, an initiative to lead such a process is needed. Darcy (2011) and Gillovic and McIntosh (2015) suggest that governmental authorities are critical for facilitating effective collaboration around accessible tourism. Our study findings suggest the need for public organizations to take the initiative to adopt collaborative efforts, since many nature-based tourism companies are too small to lead such attempts. However, to achieve collaboration between stakeholders to improve inclusive and accessible nature-based tourism, public authorities must be given the prerequisites to manage and encourage the collaboration process. The holistic approach to accessibility, which we earlier identified as paramount for promoting accessible nature-based tourism, is restricted by short budget cycles and rigid legislation.

Our research offers fresh knowledge on accessible tourism relevant for nature-based companies, organizations, and authorities involved in regional development and spatial planning. For successful collaboration to materialize, the roles and responsibilities of the involved stakeholders must be clarified. In addition, we conclude that businesses that wish to develop their products to become accessible need support in terms of economic resources, practical skills, and knowledge on the accessible nature-based tourism market, as well as how to reach the consumers. We have identified an urgent need to involve persons with disabilities in the process of planning and developing accessible nature-based tourism. Since we have limited our focus on access to nature for persons with physical disabilities, we suggest that future research on accessible nature-based tourism should also include cognitive disabilities.

In countries like Sweden, it is common that nature-based tourism companies depend on the Right of Public Access (Fredman et al., 2012), but in the case of infrastructure issues, adaptions in nature, and built facilities on private land, these remain beyond the companies’ mandate. Landownership, as well as nature conservation policies, that seek to limit certain types of adjustments and infrastructure are critical to understand in the holistic approach to accessible nature-based tourism. Therefore, we invite future research to deepen the knowledge relating to various laws and regulations, including the Public Right of Access, shoreline protection and protected areas, permit application processes, and landownership. These issues are central for further developing accessible nature-based tourism in the Nordic context, and in nature-based destinations elsewhere.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Annika Jonsson and Torun Östling who gave valuable contributions to the data collection process.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This research was part of the project “Accessible and Inclusive Nature-Based Tourism: Promising Practices of Universal Design in Sweden”, which was funded by the R&D Fund of the Swedish Tourism & Hospitality Industry, Östersund Municipality, Sweden and Mid-Sweden University, Sweden, between 2019 and 2021.