Next Article in Journal
Measurement and Prediction of Coupling Coordination Level of Economic Development, Social Stability and Ecological Environment in Qinghai—Thoughts on Sustainable Societal Safety
Previous Article in Journal
Soil Erosion Processes and Geographical Differentiation in Shaanxi during 1980–2015
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 17
10.3390/su141710514
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Individual Low-Cost Travel as a Route to Tourism Sustainability

by
Bogdan Włodarczyk
and
Waldemar Cudny
*
Institute of Urban Geography, Tourism Studies and Geoinformation, Faculty of Geographical Sciences, University of Lodz, Narutowicza 88, 90-139 Lodz, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(17), 10514; https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710514
Submission received: 15 June 2022 / Revised: 31 July 2022 / Accepted: 16 August 2022 / Published: 23 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Tourism, Culture, and Heritage)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The article discusses the issues of individual low-cost and sustainable tourism and its main goal is to confirm that individual low-cost travel is in fact a form of tourism within which the principles of sustainable tourism are implemented. It is a theoretical article based on desk research involving literature analysis. The study has confirmed that individual low-cost tourism and various other types related to it show relevant relationships with the ideas of sustainable development. These affinities are visible concerning economic, sociocultural, and environmentally balanced growth. However, the research results presented in the article are theoretical and need further empirical verification. Therefore, the authors treat this study as a work provoking discussion on the issue of the relationship between individual low-cost and sustainable tourism.

1. Introduction

Tourism is a multidimensional social, psychological, cultural, economic, and spatial phenomenon. Therefore, it is studied in various disciplines. Its latest dynamic growth is related to the intense economic development following World War II, the rise of the middle class, social mobility, and the global growth of the tourist services market [1].
Sociologists Urry and Larsen [2] (p. 4) see tourism as “a leisure activity which presupposes its opposite, namely regulated and organized work. It is one manifestation of how work and leisure are organized as separate and regulated spheres of social practice in modern societies”. Williams 2002 [1] (p. 3) noted that “Tourism is habitually viewed as a composite concept involving not just the contemporary movement of people to destinations that are removed from their normal place of residence but, in addition, the organization and conduct of their activities and of the facilities and services that are necessary for meeting their needs”. One of the definitions presents tourism as “a spatial, socio-cultural and economic phenomenon, in which an individual voluntarily, temporarily changes a place of stay for recreational purposes, as well as to gain intellectual and emotional experiences” [3] (p. 94).
As can be seen from the definitions presented above, tourism covers many spheres of life and various types of travel. Therefore, depending on the criteria adopted, different types and forms of tourism can be distinguished. These criteria include elements that characterize the trip itself. The division could be based on length (e.g., vacation or weekend trips), seasonality (winter, summer travels), organization (self-organized, package trips), type of destination (rural, urban destination, etc.), region of tourist concentration (sea, mountains, lakes, etc.). Other categories encompass elements characterizing the participants such as the number of tourists (mass tourism, individual trips), the universality of participation (e.g., incentive trips only for employees, tourism trips available for everybody), technical elements characterizing the trip (including the division based on the means of transportation, equipment used), economic issues (e.g., luxury or social tourism), and environmental impacts (e.g., mass or sustainable tourism). Another essential criterion for the categorization of tourism is the motivation to participate and the activity undertaken at the destination, based on which types of tourism are categorized. Here, the following types of tourism are distinguished: sightseeing or cultural tourism, leisure trips, and qualified or active tourism (preparation, physical strength, and qualifications) [4,5,6,7].
Additionally, one of the forms of tourism is low-cost tourism (based on the costs incurred during the trip). It is a form of travel outside mainstream tourism, carried out using the lowest possible financial resources. In addition, low-cost tourism most often encompasses individual or small group trips, using offers of nonmainstream tourist products, local or para-tourist forms of accommodation, food, or transport (individual low-cost tourism) [7,8].
Individual low-cost tourism overlaps many other types well-described in the literature. These include backpacking, rural, volunteer, pilgrimage, youth, cycling, and other types of tourism. In addition, as part of low-cost travel, numerous sustainable tourism principles are implemented. Sustainability in tourism is currently critical due to the growing environmental problems, social inequalities, poverty, and conflicts resulting from the recent growth in mass tourism. On the other hand, sustainable tourism is travel with negligible negative natural and social consequences [9], friendly to the environment and the local community [10]. Therefore, implementing its assumptions plays a unique role in a modern world plunging into environmental and socioeconomic chaos.
There is a scarcity of publications devoted strictly to the issue of individual low-cost tourism. Moreover, the links between this tourist type and the implementation of sustainable goals are very limited. Therefore, the article’s main objective is to demonstrate that individual low-cost tourism is a form of travel within which the principles of sustainable tourism are implemented, including its sociocultural, economic, and environmental pillars distinguished in the literature [10,11,12]. Additional objectives are to clarify the concept of low-cost tourism and define its relationship with classical types of tourism. The article consists of five parts, including the introduction, Section 2, followed by the analysis of the notions of sustainable development and tourism. Later, low-cost travel and its potential for sustainable tourism creation are presented, followed by the results and the conclusion.

2. Materials and Methods

The article presents the concept of sustainable development and tourism, analyzing the issue of individual low-cost tourism and its forms in the context of the implementation of sustainable tourism doctrines. It has a theoretical and review character based on desk research encompassing in-depth literature analysis.
The article is based on a literature review, which is “a systematic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners” [13] (p. 3). This article, as proposed by Paul et al. [14] (p. 337), aims to provide new and substantively interesting ideas and directions for researchers to undertake novel studies focusing on individual low-cost trips and their relationships with sustainable tourism development. Thus, the authors’ idea was to construct a theoretical paper that will be a basis for further in-depth studies on the links between individual low-cost trips and tourism sustainability.
The literature review discerns the current state of knowledge regarding the research problem undergoing investigation. Moreover, researchers could use the review to explore scientific methods, typologies, models, and other helpful research tools. The literature review includes the following main tasks: selecting the research question, choosing bibliographic databases, selecting search terms, applying practical and methodological screening criteria, performing the review, and synthesizing the results [13] (p. 4).
The first stage of the literature review in this article included formulating the research question (Table 1). It was based on the article’s main goal as follows: is individual low-cost tourism a form of travel within which the principles of sustainable tourism are implemented, including its sociocultural, economic, and environmental pillars distinguished in the literature?
The second stage encompassed the selection of bibliographic databases. Because of the scarcity of publications devoted to individual low-cost and budget tourism, Google Scholar was chosen as an initial search engine, providing a broad range of results.
The third review stage encompassed the selection of specific search keywords (terms) and search of databases for publications. The inclusion criteria for the search were based on the keywords related to the research problem of this article. Therefore, the keywords included sustainable growth, sustainable development, sustainable tourism, backpacking, youth, social, rural, volunteer, pilgrimage, and cycling tourism, low-cost and low-budget tourism. Eventually, a sample of 203 articles, books, chapters, and conference materials with the combinations of the terms mentioned above was obtained (Table 1). The articles were sourced from peer-reviewed scientific journals, and non-peer-reviewed materials were excluded from the analysis. Only peer-reviewed books and book chapters published by reputable publishers were included in the research sample. Books, chapters, and conference papers represented the fields of tourism studies, tourism geography, studies on sustainability and sustainable tourism.
The fourth stage involved screening of the selected 203 publications’ abstracts and full texts obtained from databases such as SCOPUS and ScienceDirect (for research articles) and Google Books (for books and book chapters). These publications underwent scanning to find the most essential studies analyzing the relationships between the types of tourism associated with individual low-cost trips and sustainable tourism and development. Moreover, supplementary literature was traced through the references found in the above publications. Additional six books [1,2,4,5,6,15] devoted to tourism and sustainability in general were utilized as well as further references supporting the research Section 2 [13,14,16,17,18,19,20]. These publications were used for the presentation of sustainability and tourism definitions, typologies, and description of the methodology design.
Eventually, 112 different publications were chosen for further analysis. The publications included seventy-eight articles from journals (69.6% of all the selected publications), thirty book publications and chapters in scientific books (26.8%), three publications from conference materials (2.7%), and one content of the UNWTO website (0.9%).
The leading journals considered were, among others, Journal of Sustainable Tourism (Taylor & Francis) (13 articles), Sustainability (MDPI) (nine articles), Annals of Tourism Research (Elsevier) (six papers), Tourism Management (Elsevier) (four papers), International Journal of Tourism Research (John Wiley & Sons) (three articles), Tourism (University of Łódź) (three papers), Journal of Sport & Tourism (Taylor&Francis) (two articles), Tourism Geographies (Taylor&Francis) (two articles). In addition, essential book publishers included PWN, CABI, Channell View Publications, PWE, Routledge, and Springer (Table 2).
In the database selection process (including Google Scholar, SCOPUS, and ScienceDirect), the authors adopted a similar approach to this presented in other peer-reviewed articles published in Sustainability [13,17,18,19,20].
The fifth stage of the research procedure involved an in-depth review of the finally selected 112 publications relevant to the topic of this article. The texts were carefully analyzed in search of relationships between different types of low-cost individual tourist trips, sustainable development, and sustainable tourism. Finally, the review was synthesized in the following section of the article, presenting the research results (Table 2).

3. Sustainable Development and Tourism

Sustainable development has become an indispensable paradigm for modern science and practical future-oriented thinking regarding social and economic processes [21,22,23]. According to the so-called Brundtland Report, sustainable development is economic and social growth that ensures the achievement of the needs of modern society without violating the needs of future generations [24]. It is similarly explained by the theses of the “Report of the Club of Rome” and “Agenda 21” adopted at the Second “Environment and Development” Conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 [25]. Sustainable development goals also became the basis for all activities undertaken by specialized UN agencies. Detailed policies on sustainable development (including in the field of tourism) are currently being implemented at all decision-making levels: global, continental, national, as well as regional and local [26,27].
It is commonly accepted that sustainable development should ensure high quality of life, allowing the meeting of societal needs and increasing development opportunities at various levels [25]. This development assumes that by rationally using our resources and achieving a high quality of life that is there for everyone and at the same time, the principles of respect for the natural environment, not allowing resources to be exhausted, are applied [28,29,30,31].
Sustainable tourism should fit into the three pillars of sustainable development [11]. This three-pillar idea of social, economic, and environmental sustainability (Figure 1) has become ubiquitous and is currently introduced through different branches of society and the economy [32]. Moreover, the concept of sustainable development goals was raised in 2015 with the adoption of the 2030 United Nations Agenda for Sustainable Development, together with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These goals provide an agenda to fight poverty, inequality, and injustice as well as oppose climate change. Agenda 2030 sets 17 Sustainable Development Goals, also referring to tourism growth and thus supported by the UNWTO [33].
Sustainable tourism has evolved from the sustainable development concept and includes the idea of socioeconomic and environmental sustainability along with reasonable growth in contemporary tourism.
Zaręba [12] defines sustainable tourism as any form of tourism development, management, or other tourism activity which maintains the ecological, social, and economic integrity of the given areas and preserves their natural and cultural resources unchanged. Farrel [11] also sees sustainable tourism as a “trinity” of economic, sociocultural, and environmental balance. Lane depicts sustainable tourism as a term used to distinguish the principles, laws, and management methods that indicate the path of tourism evolution in areas rich in environmental resources (natural and cultural) which are undergoing protection [34]. According to Forsyth [9], sustainable tourism should not have adverse environmental and social consequences. Butler [10] also emphasizes that it is small-scale tourism that is friendly to the natural environment and local communities.
To conclude, sustainable tourism principles apply to different forms of tourism and travel, including mass tourism (to some extent) and all niche tourism segments. These principles refer to natural, sociocultural, and economic aspects. Their introduction allows balance to be kept, guaranteeing long-term and harmonious tourism evolution [35].
In this article, we want to prove that most of the previously presented postulates regarding sustainable development in general and sustainable tourism in particular fit into low-cost tourism as broadly understood.
In the literature, sustainable tourism is often combined with specific tourism activities or forms that stand outside so-called mainstream or mass tourism. These forms include alternative tourism, soft tourism, ecotourism, responsible tourism, green tourism, agrotourism (also agritourism or rural tourism), and adventure tourism [12].
When analyzing the definitions of these forms [23], it should be noted that sustainable tourism is a kind of an umbrella brand that amalgamates the features of sustainable development from all these activities (Figure 2).
It is important to stress that there are some forms opposed to sustainable tourism functioning in the mainstream literature and travel industry practice. They include mass tourism, hard tourism, and so-called overtourism (unwanted tourism) [12]. Despite these unfavorable forms, the postulates of sustainable tourism could still, at least partially, be implemented.
The principles of responsible (sustainable) tourism, according to [36], should assume minimizing interference in the natural environment, respecting cultural diversity, maximizing the share of local people in tourist services, and increasing satisfaction from travel.
Similar principles in tourism promotion were adopted by the UNWTO, suggesting purchasing from local producers and sellers (buying local), respecting the local culture, saving energy, and preserving heritage [12]. To conclude, sustainable tourism encompasses all forms of tourism development, management, and tourism activity that maintain the ecological, social, and economic integrity of the given areas and also preserve their natural and cultural resources in an undamaged condition [12,22].
According to Niezgoda and Zmyślony [37], three main goals of sustainable tourism can be distinguished in line with the sustainable development idea:
1. Ecological goals—preservation of natural resources for tourism purposes, reduction of pollutant emissions caused by tourism.
2. Economic goals—ensuring the economic welfare of the population hosting tourists, maintenance and optimal use of the tourist infrastructure, achieving competitive advantage.
3. Social goals—good employment opportunities in tourism, providing leisure for local people and visitors, protecting the cultural identity of the local population, increasing the participation of local people in tourism policy, and improving their quality of life.
In light of the previous considerations, it can be assumed that sustainable tourism might be an effective tool to achieve sustainable development goals in general. Sustainable tourism may also maintain tourism activity in the longer term. Moreover, it could apply to all forms, including so-called mass tourism, as a way of introducing the principles of sustainable development. Assuming further growth in demand for tourist services, sustainable tourism should create a framework for development that is as environmentally friendly as possible. Furthermore, tourism should not be considered as an activity competing for access to resources; instead, it should be treated as a method/tool of economic diversification and integrated into an overall development plan.

4. Low-Cost Travel and Its Potential for Sustainable Tourism Creation

Defining the concept of low-cost tourism is difficult [7,8]. It includes trips made at the lowest possible cost, although this condition does not always have to be met while recognizing a trip as carried out at a low cost is subjective and depends on the financial resources of the travelers. Sometimes, trips unavailable for the less affluent are subjectively perceived as low-cost by wealthy tourists. This could be true in the case of different travel destinations. For example, long-distance trips carried out at the lowest cost may require significant funds, e.g., due to elevated costs of transportation [8].
Defining low-cost tourism is also challenging because of the multitude of terms associated with it. For example, according to Kozłowski et al. [7] (p. 260), “Individual low-cost tourism, also known as low-budget tourism, includes tourist trips carried out independently by single people or groups of two, which take place with the lowest possible use of financial resources”.
These authors also claim that the concept of low-budget tourism and low costs are not clear-cut. Low-budget trips are inexpensive by definition (ex-ante). In this case, already at the planning stage, tourists have a low budget and adjust the destination, type of trip, and services accordingly. In turn, low-cost travel often evolves ex-post in that we find out if the trip was made at a low cost after completing it. In such a case, the low cost may result, for example, from the use of cheaper than planned accommodation, transport, or discounts received on some services. It also might be a result of a preliminarily planned low budget. Therefore, low-cost tourism is a broader concept than low-budget tourism [7].
Zawadka and Pietrzak-Zawadka [8] noticed that low-cost, low-budget tourism, backpacking, and hiking tourism are sometimes treated as synonyms. These authors also claim that, in practice, not all of these types of tourism are low-cost [7] and suggest that backpacking overlaps with low-cost tourism only in certain situations. The uniqueness of backpacking is more related to the specificity of the trip than just its low cost.
Moreover, low-cost tourism can also be part of mass tourism. In this case, it involves trips to popular destinations offering tourists, for instance, specific 3S products (sea, sand, and sun). In this case, products offering the basic level, cheap flights [38], low-cost accommodation and catering [39] are often utilized. This offer has developed in recent decades to ensure affordable holiday opportunities [40]. However, this type of low-cost mobility does not fall within the scope of the issues discussed here.
The authors proposed their own definition of individual low-cost tourism to clarify the research subject represented in this article. Thus, individual low-cost tourism covers trips within all non-mass types of tourism that do not require high travel and maintenance costs and the purchase of costly specialized equipment for their cultivation, has no adverse effects on the natural environment, and at the same time supports local social and economic development. The participants in individual low-cost tourism include visitors representing a tourist profile similar to the drifter type proposed in Cohen’s typology [41]. So, they are travelers with limited contact with the high-scale tourism industry, mainly without a fixed timetable, have a limited budget, and are more risk-oriented. Therefore, forms of mass tourism like package holidays, cruises, 3S products (sea, sand, and sun), etc., even if realized on a low-cost basis, were excluded from this study.
This article also assumed that individual low-cost travel might be carried out within the framework of other tourism types and forms well-known in the literature. In this understanding, such low-cost trips form a broad concept amalgamating other types of tourist trips. Due to the scarcity of publications related directly to individual low-cost tourism, the authors decided to present their own proposal of the types of tourism that, in their opinion, show links with the individual low-cost tourism analyzed in the article. Therefore, the authors’ tourism knowledge and the literature review directed the choice of these types. The latter showed several types of tourism with considerable links to low-cost, low-budget, and cheap tourism.
Moreover, the selection of tourism types related to low-cost tourism was guided by features of drifter tourists represented in Cohen’s typology [41]. Therefore, the taxonomy includes those types of tourism in which travelers have mostly limited contact with the high-scale tourism industry, mainly without a fixed timetable, have a limited budget, and are more risk-oriented. These include backpacking, rural and agrotourism, social tourism, volunteer, pilgrimage, youth, and bike tourism (Figure 3).
However, the authors are aware of the existence of low-cost travel in other types of tourism. Therefore, they treat the proposed taxonomy of types of individual low-cost tourism as a preliminary one, inciting further scientific discussion and additional research in this field. Therefore, in Figure 3, an extra field labeled with a question mark was left as an encouragement to develop the proposed taxonomy in subsequent scientific papers.
Backpacker tourism, according to van Egmond [42] (p. 92), attracts “young and budget-minded tourists who exhibit a preference for inexpensive accommodation, an emphasis on meeting other people (locals and outsiders), an independently organized and flexible itinerary, longer rather than brief vacations, and an emphasis on informal and participatory recreation activities”.
Backpacking interconnects with tramping which appeared as “drifter-related” trips. Cohen [41] in his tourist typology described “drifters” as travelers who have less contact with the tourism industry, have no fixed timetable, a limited budget, and are more risk-oriented. “Drifting” resulted from rebellion against political (war in Vietnam) and economic (mass consumerism) mainstream patterns of the 1960s and 1970s. “Drifters” searched for mysterious, noninstitutionalized adventures in nontypical tourist destinations [43], and this contributed to the development of tramping and backpacking as new types of tourism (Figure 4).
From the article’s perspective, linking backpacking with low-cost tourism is vital. The very definition of backpacking defines tourists as focused on low-cost trips and accommodation [42]. Backpackers consider themselves to be low-budget “drifters” [45]. Paris and Teye [46] indicate low cost and independence, experiential, personal, and social growth as vital factors of the increase in backpacking. Other publications also emphasize the importance of the low cost in backpacking [39,47,48,49,50,51].
Backpacking is often done by young people who do not have significant financial resources. Therefore, backpackers show rebellious attitudes, oppose consumerism, and do not use expensive commercial tourist products. In addition, these behaviors are motivated by the desire to experience the adventure and get to know the life of local people, which additionally implies lower travel costs [43].
It should be emphasized, however, that modern backpacking is heterogeneous. It is also practiced by the mature and wealthy who prefer comfort and use expensive tourist services. In the literature, this group is called “modern backpackers” [52], and this segment should be excluded from the analysis of low-cost tourism.
Youth tourism as a tourism type is distinguished based on the age of the participants [5] which, according to the UNWTO, includes people between 15 and 29 years of age. It comprises individually organized educational and recreational trips both to domestic and distant destinations and is related to backpacking [52,53]. Therefore, they are presented as one to avoid duplicating the presented content (Figure 5).
A significant part of youth trips can also be categorized as low-cost tourism. Young people focused on adventure, not comfort, most often do not have considerable financial resources and combine travel with part-time work (work and travel programs). Nevertheless, young people willingly go to exotic destinations, are eager to get to know the local life, and use the services offered to local people [52]. Richards and King [53] pointed out that the growth in youth tourism was related to the development of low-cost airlines and budget tourism services [55]. Demeter and Bratucu [54] emphasized that most youth tourists choose cheap accommodation. On the other hand, these authors also stated that some youth tourists have resources (e.g., thanks to their parents) and use packages typical for mass tourism.
Many features of backpacking resemble the features of sustainable tourism, and this results from the values and motivations of backpackers [56,57,58]. For example, they often integrate with the visited environment, show understanding of the need to protect it, and avoid consumerism by using local products and services. This reduces resource consumption and decreases environmental pollution, including the carbon footprint at tourism destinations [45,59,60].
Backpackers’ destinations are often underdeveloped areas away from major tourist centers and routes [61]. Therefore, backpackers’ expenditures, instead of going to corporations and in large tourist centers, feeds the budgets of small family businesses in poorer countries and towns. Thus, they contribute to income redistribution and create socially just and economically efficient development. Additionally, backpackers are interested in an authentic culture that they can assimilate with, therefore, they do not interfere drastically in local communities, which helps maintain the sociocultural balance in their destinations [56,60].
Loker-Murphy and Pearce [39] argued that youth travelers form a significant amount of backpackers throughout the world and in Australia. Paris and Teye [46] (p. 246) stated that the first trip when a person has been away from home for an extended period of time is often backpacking. Sørensen [48] (p. 854) argued that backpacking is characterized by a “dominance of youthful age groups”. Further, O’Regan [51] (p. 51) saw the term “backpacker” as “interchangeable with youth tourist”. Due to the relationships between backpacking and youth tourism mentioned previously, sustainable features related to backpacking may be ascribed to youth tourism. However, one condition is that youth tourists must respect backpacking values and motivations. It is also important not to equate all forms of backpacking with sustainable tourism and development. Sometimes the margin between backpacking and typical mass tourism becomes a thin line and backpacking ceases to show the features of responsible and sustainable travel [58,61].
Social tourism is another type associated with low-cost tourism. “In practice, social tourism usually refers to budget-friendly domestic holidays. In some cases, day trips to themeparks, museums, and attractions are funded or made available at highly reduced rates by charities or agencies in the public sector” [62] (p. 403). Social tourism mainly concerns people who cannot finance a trip on their own. These are young people from poor backgrounds, older people with low retirement benefits, and low-wage working people [63]. This type of tourism also includes trips by other excluded people, e.g., for reasons of disability, age, or social status [63,64]. Tourist trips perform several social functions related to health, well-being, happiness, and quality of life. The significant role of travel in personal development justifies subsidizing tourism by states and corporations. Social tourism is most often based on low budgets [62,64] and, thus, it can be understood as part of low-cost tourism.
Rural tourism may be treated as another form of cheap travel that might be defined as “The tourism which satisfies these forms: located in rural areas, functionally rural, set on a rural scale, traditional in character, representing the complex pattern of rural environment, economy, history and location” [34] (p. 14). Rural tourism is not a new type of tourism; however, its popularity has been growing since the 1970s when it began to be used for the development and economic diversification of rural areas [65]. It offers the possibility of recreation, often active, in areas with a predominance of agricultural production, in an environment other than the urban one. Its specific form is agritourism (also farm tourism, farm holiday), associated with stays at functioning rural farms. Rural tourism also provides contact with nature, local culture, rural communities and customs, education, and the opportunity to use rural resources (including crafts and food) [66].
The literature emphasizes the low cost of tourism services (accommodation, gastronomy) and the favorable cost/benefit ratio of rural tourism [67,68,69,70]. These elements contribute to the development of agritourism and lower the economic threshold for tourism for people with lower incomes. Moreover, many publications [71,72,73] present rural tourism as a form of low-cost backpacking. This approach additionally connects rural tourism with the low-cost tourism described in the article.
Rural tourism exhibits the characteristics of sustainable tourism due to the minimization of adverse environmental impacts and the socioeconomic and cultural characteristics increasing the level of sustainability in the host regions [74,75,76,77]. Furthermore, Greffe [78], Gannon [79], Lane and Kastenholz [65], and Mirela [80] suggest the vital role of rural tourism in the economic development of poorer rural areas by generating income and jobs in the tourism sector. This, in turn, leads to a shift from traditional agrarian to diversified, economically resilient, and sustainable economies. On the other hand, Aronsson [75] and Fons et al. [81] argue that rural tourism is a responsible form developing in harmony with nature and guaranteeing tourists contact with authentic local culture in rural destinations. Wojciechowska [66] emphasizes these features of agritourism as well.
Majdak and de Almeida [82] draw attention to the excellent potential for deglomeration of tourism thanks to rural trips. Therefore, an appropriate tourism development policy in rural areas may contribute to redistributing tourist flows from areas threatened by overtourism.
Rural tourism and agritourism are also related to social tourism, as previously discussed. Often, the destinations for trips subsidized by the state or workplaces are villages. Their offer is cheaper, gives good recreational opportunities, and is combined with education, which is particularly important in the case of social tourism for children and adolescents [83]. Pilgrimage tourism also has links with low-cost tourism. Spiritual journeys took place in ancient Egypt, Rome, India, China, and medieval Europe, and this type of tourism is also one of the most popular types of travel today. However, departure decisions are also motivated by other goals [84]:
  • religious (prayer, spiritual experiences related to religion);
  • cognitive–religious or religious–cognitive (depending on the proportion of activity) (prayer, spiritual experiences, sightseeing, learning about the history of holy places), which together can be included in so-called pilgrimage/ religious tourism;
  • nonreligious (cognitive, not related to prayer or religious experiences), which can be included in cultural tourism (Figure 6).
Within religious tourism, pilgrimages should be distinguished as “A specific form of religious tourism. They are characterized by a clearly defined and foreground spiritual theme. The pilgrimages’ purpose is to reach a holy place (sanctuary). The time of travel and stay in the center of worship is devoted to prayer, meditation, penance and other forms of piety” [85] (p. 16).
Pilgrimage participants are often young tourists. Examples include religious trips to holy places in Poland (e.g., the Sanctuary of Jasna Góra Monastery in Częstochowa) of school pupils and scouts [86,87,88]. Another goal of youth pilgrimages is World Youth Day (WYD) organized at prominent sanctuaries with the participation of the highest church hierarchs [89,90]. Many pilgrims travel in groups, but individual pilgrimages are still popular, for example, to Santiago de Compostela in Spain, similar to backpacking [91,92,93].
Participants in pilgrimage tourism are distinguished by multiple features that characterize low-cost tourists [85,91,92,93]. According to Mendel [91] and Chang et al. [92], they often travel on foot or by bike, taking advantage of cheap accommodation and food due to their focus on spiritual goals instead of a high travel standard. They often journey long distances individually or in small groups and must be independent. Therefore they travel with tourist equipment and their own food (backpacking) [85].
Religious tourism, and pilgrimages, in particular, demonstrate sustainable features, e.g., thanks to the relationships (overlaps) between it and the voluntary tourism described later (volunteers working to serve pilgrim groups) and backpacking (the style of travel of individual pilgrims). Therefore, it seems reasonable to assign the sustainable features of backpacking and volunteer tourism to pilgrimage tourism. Pilgrims seek redemption of sins and contemplation and, thus, avoiding consumerism and luxury while choosing simple, less polluting, lower carbon-footprint products during the trip also seems to be significant [86]. According to Kotze and McKay [93] (p. 1001), many pilgrims also use local goods and services outside the mainstream tourist offer, contributing to the development of small family businesses, more equitable distribution of income, and the socioeconomic development of local communities.
Cycling tourism was popular as early as late 19th century when bicycles became an essential means of everyday transport. Later, the middle class (merchants, craftspeople) grew richer and began using cars which became popular by the early 1920s. Finally, the turn of the 21st century brought a renaissance in the use of bicycles for passenger transport and tourism. With the latest shift to a balanced approach to public transport and tourism, there is a noticeable revival of the idea of cycling in the United States, Europe, New Zealand, and Australia [94,95,96,97].
There are several definitions of cycling tourism [94,95]. Some people classify all tourist trips with bicycles as cycling tourism, even if the bicycle is used only for a part. On the other hand, others define cycling tourism as only that where a bicycle is the primary or only means of transport. Some [95] argue that sightseeing or leisure tourism, in which cycling is not an essential user experience, should be excluded and treated as part of cultural or leisure tourism. On the other hand, bicycle tourism should be considered where the pleasure of cycling is the most crucial tourist experience [95].
Kurek et al. [98] (p. 259) defined cycling tourism as that in which “the tourist’s means of transportation is a bicycle, and the luggage is transported in special luggage panniers or trailers. Cycling tourism is of a sightseeing nature, but often other goals are achieved like sporting”. These authors distinguish street-type and off-road cycling. In addition, they also mention credit-card touring (bicycle trips with minimal luggage and using the existing tourist base paid, e.g., by credit card), fully loaded touring (journeys with luggage, including a tent and food in panniers and trailers), expedition touring (trips with luggage of the adventure type to a remote region of the world), supported touring (bicycle trips organized with the support of other types of transport).
Other studies also indicate the vital role of keeping travel costs low as a motivation for cycling among some of its participants [99]. It should be emphasized that cycling often takes place in local and regional destinations, does not require expensive means of transport (cars), and does not generate expenses for fuel, parking lots, or vehicle maintenance. In addition, it allows the cyclist to take many necessary resources, e.g., a tent, food, and a field cooker, which makes it easier to plan and implement a low-cost trip.
Cycling is also treated as sustainable tourism, for instance, due to the low carbon footprint, the use of ecological transport, as well as local and regional attractions and services, but also the opportunity to take one’s own resources, which limits the consumption of tourist goods [97,100,101,102]. Moreover, cycling tourism is a factor in the activation of rural regions, therefore, it can be part of rural tourism [65,95,97,103]. Some authors perceive cycling tourism, especially fully loaded bicycle touring, as a form of tourism much like backpacking [94,104]. Thus, in this type of tourism, sustainability features can be distinguished similarly to backpacking tourism, such as integration with the visited environment, limited tourist goods consumption, use of local suppliers, visiting places outside mainstream destinations, and respect for the local culture.
Volunteer tourism (also voluntourism, volunteer travel) is another type showing connections with low-cost tourism. It originated in Europe and later spread to the USA, Australia, and the rest of the world. Volunteer tourism includes “tourists who for various reasons volunteer in an organized way to undertake holidays that might involve aiding or alleviating the material poverty of some groups of society, the restoration of certain environments, or research into aspects of society or environment” [105] (p. 1).
According to Wearing and McGehee [106], volunteer tourism is associated with two main motives. The first one concerns a willingness to ethically and altruistically participate in projects to help other people and the environment; the second one concerns personal benefits (physical and spiritual) that the tourist obtains from such projects. Volunteers travel in their free time to places where help is needed for conservation projects, scientific research, medical assistance, economic and social development, and fighting natural disasters or terrorist attacks [106].
Volunteer tourism has now become a profitable business. Therefore, many organizations offer package trips, including participation in volunteer community aid, teaching, environmental help and research, and construction projects [105]. Therefore, there has been criticism of volunteer tourism [107] as an increasingly commercial phenomenon (a trend that contradicts the idea of volunteering), petrifying poverty and promoting dependence on external help, thus, distorting the image of developing societies. However, despite the controversy, volunteer tourism still has a positive function in many societies and areas.
Low-cost tourism can be seen as part of volunteer tourism. Everingham [108] points out that independent backpackers are essential volunteer tourism participants. They look for encounters with local people and authentic experiences and are eager to help. They are often young tourists with low budgets [39], therefore, they prefer individual low-cost trips connected with work for local communities and avoid commercial products. Ooi and Lang [61] indicate that many volunteer tourists are backpackers, often young, focused on traveling to distant places, whose goal is to help and learn about life in exotic parts of the world. These people do not use expensive commercial tourism products provided by commercial organizations. Instead, they prefer low-cost accommodation and food, often remaining in the care of the communities to whom they provide voluntary help. As Tomazos and Butler [109] and Ooi and Lang [61] suggest, many organizations mediate the establishment of contacts between potential volunteer tourists and those needing help. These organizations operate on a noncommercial basis and offer contacts and low-cost or no-cost assistance in managing the trip.
Volunteer tourism is seen as part of alternative tourism. Thus, it causes less damage to society and culture and can lead to balanced resource use, with benefits split among local entrepreneurs, residents, and the mainstream tourism industry [105]. Volunteer tourism seems to contribute to sustainable tourism development mainly in the social and cultural spheres [61]. Thanks to the activities of volunteers, ecological, educational, research, health, and even engineering projects (e.g., building public utility facilities) are supported. This leads to the development of local communities, education, and an improvement in the quality of life while favoring the self-development of tourists. In this case, similarly to backpacking, tourists’ motivations and the resulting goals favor responsible behaviors and attitudes during these trips [110]. In addition, the volunteer and backpacking tourism relationships described above imply the presence of other sustainable backpacking features (e.g., respect for the local culture, minimizing consumerism). On the other hand, some authors argue that volunteer tourism (e.g., due to the progressive commercialization of this form of tourism) does not always show features of sustainability [111].

5. Results

As presented in the introduction, the notion of sustainability is based on three interconnected elements encompassing economic, social, and environmental (or ecological) pillars, also known as dimensions, aspects, or components. This “three-pillar” sustainability concept is a common interpretation of the issue in scientific literature. Therefore, the discourse about sustainability is often centered around the three elements mentioned above [32].
The environmental pillar is related to the natural environment where people and economies exist. For sustainable development, it is vital to protect natural resources from depletion and reduce pollution, waste production, and CO2 emissions. Moreover, it is crucial to respect nature, sustain biodiversity, and optimize the use of natural resources [25] (Table 3).
The social pillar requests maintaining social and cultural values in localities, regions, and countries. The social dimension also requires upholding human well-being in the environment, economy, and culture and developing social equity [25] (Table 3).
The economic pillar is embedded in the sustainable treatment of economically significant natural resources. Moreover, it should ensure responsible growth over a long time and economic well-being at different societal and spatial scales [25] (Table 3).
Table 3 presents the features of low-cost tourism forms responsible for realizing sustainability pillars in the tourism context. As for the environmental pillar, backpackers are responsible tourists willing to skip large-scale mass tourism products and optimize the use of resources by reducing consumption, decreasing waste production, environmental pollution, and the carbon footprint at tourism destinations [57,59,60]. Agritourism participants present a similar responsible pro-environment philosophy [75,81]. Cycling offers sustainable low-emission transportation, thus reducing adverse environmental effects [97,100,101,102]. Youth tourists often share similar habits as backpackers and, thus, often represent similar environmentally responsible behaviors towards the natural environment [52,54].
Regarding the social pillar, backpacking, agritourism, and volunteer tourism participants strive for authentic tourism experiences based on local assets and communities [56,60,66,108]. Furthermore, agritourism [66,81] and volunteer tourism [110] also respect local culture and communities. This helps sustain social and cultural values, identities, relationships, and institutions in host regions. Backpackers [61], volunteer tourists [106,108,109], and pilgrimage tourists [86] wish to help others; support the development of local societies [106,107]. Thus, they preserve the local social and cultural fabric and uphold human well-being. Moreover, backpackers and social tourists enjoy personal development based on experiences resulting from the relationship between tourists and local communities [63,64] that strengthen the social pillar among tourists (Table 3).
As for the economic pillar, backpackers [56,59,60], cycling tourists [95,97,99,102], youths [52,54], volunteer tourists [61,105], agritourists Lane, B.; Kastenholz, E., [65], and pilgrimage tourists [87,88] are used to local products outside the offer of big tourist corporations and mainstream tourist regions. This helps create economic development and well-being in peripheral areas [61,95]. Moreover, backpackers focus on less consumption and, thus, contribute to lower use of economic resources and their preservation for future generations [56,59,60], and so do pilgrimage tourists [86] (Table 3).

6. Conclusions

Individual low-cost tourism is a type of tourism that involves trips with the lowest possible use of financial resources, most often in small groups or independently [7]. Travel of this type amalgamates many classic types of tourism presented in the literature [1,4,5,6]. These include, among others backpacking [45,46], youth [53], social [62,64,112], rural [67], pilgrimage [85], cycling [99] and volunteer tourism [61,108].
The article’s primary goal was to demonstrate that individual low-cost trips enable the implementation of sustainable tourism principles. The research goal was achieved. The literature review confirmed that the types of tourism overlapping with low-cost travel offer many relationships with sustainable development. These affinities are visible in the three fundamental pillars of sustainable development manifested in the sustainable tourism “trinity” of economic, sociocultural and environmentally balanced growth [11].
The theoretical implication of our analysis is that individual low-cost tourism represents features of sustainability covered by the “three-pillar” sustainability concept. The main managerial implication is that implementation and support given to the growth of individual low-cost tourism may strengthen the host destinations’ sustainability, promote sustainable economy in localities, bring more social justice, protect the environment and natural resources from exhaustion.
The analysis presented in the article is based on the literature review, is theoretical, and, therefore, should constitute the basis for further verification in empirical research. Thus, the authors treat this paper as a publication provoking an academic discussion on the relationships between low-cost and sustainable tourism.
Subsequent studies based on empirical research on the topic are critical and should include the analysis of travel motives and low-cost tourist behaviors (e.g., through surveys) related to sustainable development and sustainable tourism principles. Another vital issue presented here is the concept of low-cost tourism itself as further empirical and theoretical research should be carried out to make this concept more precise. Then, the relationships between low-cost tourism and other types distinguished in the literature could be analyzed. Finally, the shared features between low-cost and backpacking, youth, volunteer, and rural tourism ought to be studied.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft, B.W. and W.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding. The APC was funded by The University of Lodz, Narutowicza 68, 90-136, Lodz, Poland.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Williams, S.W. Tourism Geography; Routledge: London, UK, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  2. Urry, J.; Larsen, J. The Tourist Gaze 3.0; Sage: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  3. Liszewski, S. Przestrzeń turystyczna. Turyzm/Tourism 1995, 5, 87–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kurek, W. (Ed.) Turystyka; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warsaw, Poland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  5. Gaworecki, W.W. Turystyka; PWE: Warsaw, Poland, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  6. Kowalczyk, A. Geografia Turyzmu; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warsaw, Poland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  7. Kozłowski, L.; Brzykca, A.; Rudnicki, R. Niskobudżetowa turystyka indywidualna jako forma aktywności turystycznej. Ekon. Probl. Tur. 2016, 33, 259–272. [Google Scholar]
  8. Zawadka, J.; Pietrzak-Zawadka, J. Individual Budget Travels as a Form of Leisure Among the Polish Citizens. In Innovative Approaches to Tourism and Leisure, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference IACuDiT, Athens, Greece, 25–27 May 2017; Katsoni, V., Velander, K., Eds.; Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  9. Forsyth, T. Environmental responsibility and business regulation: The case of sustainable tourism. Geogr. J. 1997, 163, 270–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Butler, R.W. Tourism destination development: Cycles and forces, myths and realities. Tour. Recreat. Res. 2009, 34, 247–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Farrell, B.H. Conventional or sustainable tourism? No room for choice. Tour. Manag. 1999, 20, 189–191. [Google Scholar]
  12. Zaręba, D. Ekoturystyka; PWN: Warsaw, Poland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  13. Li, C.; Mirosa, M.; Bremer, P. Review of online food delivery platforms and their impacts on sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Paul, J.; Merchant, A.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Rose, G. Writing an impactful review article: What do we know and what do we need to know? J. Bus. Res. 2021, 133, 337–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kaczmarek, J.; Stasiak, A.; Włodarczyk, B. Produkt Turystyczny—Pomysł, Organizacja, Zarządzanie—Wydanie II Zmienione; Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne: Warsaw, Poland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  16. Fink, A. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper; SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  17. Boz, Z.; Korhonen, V.; Koelsch Sand, C. Consumer considerations for the implementation of sustainable packaging: A review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Armenia, S.; Dangelico, R.M.; Nonino, F.; Pompei, A. Sustainable project management: A conceptualization-oriented review and a framework proposal for future studies. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lampridi, M.G.; Sørensen, C.G.; Bochtis, D. Agricultural sustainability: A review of concepts and methods. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Alshehhi, A.; Nobanee, H.; Khare, N. The impact of sustainability practices on corporate financial performance: Literature trends and future research potential. Sustainability 2018, 10, 494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hunter, C. Sustainable Tourism as an Adaptative Paradigm. Ann. Tour. Res. 1995, 24, 850–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Niezgoda, A. Obszar Recepcji Turystycznej w Warunkach Rozwoju Zrównoważonego; Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Poznaniu: Poznań, Poland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  23. Niezgoda, A. The role of different tourism concepts and forms inthe pursuance of sustainable development goals. Turyzm 2008, 18, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. WCED. Our Common Future. The Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1987.
  25. Moldan, B.; Janoušková, S.; Hák, T. How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 17, 4–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kowalczyk, A. (Ed.) Turystyka Zrównoważona; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warsaw, Poland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  27. Mika, M. Założenia i Determinanty Podtrzymywalności Lokalnego Rozwoju Turystyki; Instytut Geografii i Gospodarki Przestrzennej Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Kraków, Poland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  28. Boulding, K.E. The Meaning of the 20th Century: The Great Transition; Lanham University Press of America: Lanham, MD, USA, 1964. [Google Scholar]
  29. Meadows, D.H.; Meadows, D.L.; Randers, J.; Behrens, W.W. The Limits to Growth; Universe Books: New York, NY, USA, 1972. [Google Scholar]
  30. Faber, M. How to be an Ecological Economist; Working Papers 0454; University of Heidelberg, Depatment of Economics: Heidelberg, Germany, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  31. Brown, L.R. World on the Edge; Earth Policy Institute: Norton, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  32. Purvis, B.; Mao, Y.; Robinson, D. Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins. Sustain. Sci. 2019, 14, 681–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. UNWTO. Tourism in the 2030 Agenda. Available online: https://www.unwto.org/tourism-in-2030-agenda (accessed on 16 July 2022).
  34. Lane, B. What is rural tourism? J. Sustain. Tour. 1994, 2, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. UNWTO. Sustainable Development of Tourism. Conceptual Definitions; UNWTO: Madrid, Spain, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  36. Blamey, R.K. Principles of ecotourism. In The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism; Weaver, D.B., Ed.; CAB International: Wallingford, UK, 2001; pp. 5–22. [Google Scholar]
  37. Niezgoda, A.; Zmyślony, P. Identyfing Determinants of the Development of Rural Tourist Destinations in Poland; Tourism; Institute for Tourism, Croatian National Tourist Board: Zagreb, Croatia, 2002; Volume 51, pp. 451–452. [Google Scholar]
  38. Eugenio-Martin, J.L.; Inchausti-Sintes, F. Low-cost travel and tourism expenditures. Ann. Tour. Res. 2016, 57, 140–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Loker-Murphy, L.; Pearce, P.L. Young budget travelers: Backpackers in Australia. Ann. Tour. Res. 1995, 22, 819–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Rogerson, C.M.; Rogerson, J.M. Camping tourism: A review of recent international scholarship. Geoj. Tour. Geosites 2020, 28, 349–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Cohen, E. Toward a sociology of international tourism. Soc. Res. 1972, 39, 164–182. [Google Scholar]
  42. Van Egmond, A.N.F. Understanding Western Tourists in Developing Countries; Cabi: Wallingford, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  43. Ateljevic, I.; Doorne, S. Theoretical encounters: A review of backpacker literature. In The Global Nomad: Backpacker Travel in Theory and Practice; Richards, G., Wilson, J., Eds.; Chanell View Publications: Clevedon Hall, UK, 2004; pp. 60–76. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wilson, J.; Richards, G. Suspending reality: An exploration of enclaves and the backpacker experience. Curr. Issues Tour. 2008, 11, 187–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Speed, C. Are backpackers ethical tourists? In Backpacker Tourism: Concepts and Profiles; Hannam, K., Ateljevic, I., Eds.; Channel View Publications: Clevedon, UK, 2008; pp. 54–81. [Google Scholar]
  46. Paris, C.M.; Teye, V. Backpacker motivations: A travel career approach. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2010, 19, 244–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Spreitzhofer, G. The roaring nineties Low-budget Backpacking in South-East Asia as an Appropriate Alternative to Third World Mass Tourism? Asien Afr. Lat. 2002, 30, 115–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sørensen, A. Backpacker ethnography. Ann. Tour. Res. 2003, 30, 847–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Majstorović, V.; Stankov, U.; Stojanov, S. The presence of backpacking tourism in Europe. Turizam 2013, 17, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chen, G.-H.; Huang, S.S. Backpacker tourism: A perspective article. Tour. Rev. 2020, 75, 158–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. O’Regan, M. From its drifter past to nomadic futures: Future directions in backpacking research and practice. Tour. Stud. 2021, 21, 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Richards, G.; Wilson, J. Youth tourism: Finally coming of age? In Niche Tourism; Novelli, M., Ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2007; pp. 53–60. [Google Scholar]
  53. Richards, G.; King, B. Youth travel and backpacking. Travel Tour. Anal. 2003, 6, 1–23. [Google Scholar]
  54. Demeter, T.; Bratucu, G. Typologies of youth tourism. Bull. Transilv. Univ. Brasov. Econ. Sci. Ser. V 2014, 7, 115–122. [Google Scholar]
  55. Maoz, D. Backpackers Motivations: The role of culture and nationality. Ann. Tour. Res. 2006, 34, 122–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Iaquinto, B.L. “I recycle, I turn out the lights”: Understanding the everyday sustainability practices of backpackers. J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 577–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Iaquinto, B.L.; Pratt, S. Practicing sustainability as a backpacker: The role of nationality. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2020, 22, 100–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Agyeiwaah, E.; Dayour, F.; Otoo, F.E.; Goh, B. Understanding backpacker sustainable behavior using the tri-component attitude model. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 1193–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Dayour, F.; Adongo, C.A.; Taale, F. Determinants of backpackers’ expenditure. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2016, 17, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Canavan, B. An existentialist exploration of tourism sustainability: Backpackers fleeing and finding themselves. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 551–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ooi, N.; Laing, J.H. Backpacker tourism: Sustainable and purposeful? Investigating the overlap between backpacker tourism and volunteer tourism motivations. J. Sustain. Tour. 2010, 18, 191–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Minnaert, L.; Maitland, R.; Miller, G. What is social tourism? In Encyclopedia of Tourism; Jafari, J., Xiao, H., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2011; pp. 872–873. [Google Scholar]
  63. Włodarczyk, B. Turystyka społeczna—Próba definicji zjawiska. In Turystyka Społeczna w Regionie Łódzkim; Stasiak, A., Ed.; WSTH w Łodzi: Łódź, Poland, 2010; pp. 23–35. [Google Scholar]
  64. Minnaert, L. Social tourism participation: The role of tourism inexperience and uncertainty. Tour. Manag. 2014, 40, 282–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Lane, B.; Kastenholz, E. Rural tourism: The evolution of practice and research approaches—Towards a new generation concept? J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 1133–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wojciechowska, J. Agroturystyka—Signum polskiej turystyki. Acta Sci. Polonorum. Oeconomia 2010, 9, 597–606. [Google Scholar]
  67. Konečný, O. Geographical perspectives on agritourism in the Czech Republik. Morav. Geogr. Rep. 2014, 22, 15–23. [Google Scholar]
  68. Tolstad, H.K. Development of rural-tourism experiences through networking: An example from Gudbrandsdalen, Norway. Nor. Geogr. Tidsskr.-Nor. J. Geogr. 2014, 68, 111–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Bajgier-Kowalska, M.; Tracz, M.; Uliszak, R. Modeling the state of agritourism in the Malopolska region of Poland. Tour. Geogr. 2017, 19, 502–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Stoian, M.; Marcuta, A.; Niculae, I.; Marcuta, L. Analysis of agritourism and rural tourism situation in the North East of Romania. Sci. Pap. Ser. Manag. Econ. Eng. Agric. Rural. Dev. 2019, 19, 535–542. [Google Scholar]
  71. Gibson, C.; Connell, J. ‘Bongo Fury’: Tourism, music and cultural economy at Byron Bay, Australia. Tijdschr. Econ. Soc. Geogr. 2003, 94, 164–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hottola, P. The metaspatialities of control management in tourism: Backpacking in India. Tour. Geogr. 2005, 7, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Argent, N. Trouble in paradise? Governing Australia’s multifunctional rural landscapes. Aust. Geogr. 2011, 42, 183–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bramwell, B. Rural tourism and sustainable rural tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 1994, 2, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Aronsson, L. Sustainable tourism systems: The example of sustainable rural tourism in Sweden. J. Sustain. Tour. 1994, 2, 77–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Muresan, I.C.; Oroian, C.F.; Harun, R.; Arion, F.H.; Porutiu, A.; Chiciudean, G.O.; Lile, R. Local residents’ attitude toward sustainable rural tourism development. Sustainability 2016, 8, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Kantar, S.; Svržnjak, K. Development of Sustainable Rural Tourism. Deturope 2017, 9, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Greffe, X. Is rural tourism a lever for economic and social development? J. Sustain. Tour. 1994, 2, 22–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Gannon, A. Rural tourism as a factor in rural community economic development for economies in transition. J. Sustain. Tour. 1994, 2, 51–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Mirela, C.S. Agrotourism and gastronomic tourism, parts of sustainable tourism. J. Hortic. For. Biotechnol. 2016, 20, 106–109. [Google Scholar]
  81. Fons, M.V.S.; Fierro, J.A.M.; Patiño, M.G. Rural tourism: A sustainable alternative. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 551–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Majdak, P.; de Almeida, A.M.M. Pre-Emptively Managing Overtourism by Promoting Rural Tourism in Low-Density Areas: Lessons from Madeira. Sustainability 2022, 14, 757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Niedziółka, A.; Bogusz, M. Uwarunkowania rozwoju turystyki społecznej na przykładzie gminy Istebna. Folia Pomeranae Univ. Technol. Stetinensis Oeconomica 2011, 288, 133–142. [Google Scholar]
  84. Henderson, J.C. Religious tourism and its management: The hajj in Saudi Arabia. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2011, 13, 541–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Jackowski, A. Pielgrzymki = turystyka pielgrzymkowa = turystyka religijna? Rozważania terminologiczne. Turyzm 1998, 8, 5–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Jackowski, A. Pielgrzymki zagraniczne szansą dla rozwoju polskich ośrodków kultu religijnego. Pr. Geogr. 2007, 117, 239–257. [Google Scholar]
  87. Mróz, F.; Mróz, Ł. Nowe trendy w turystyce religijnej. In Współczesne Uwarunkowania i Problemy Rozwoju Turystyki; Pawlusiński, R., Ed.; Instytut Geografii i Gospodarki Przestrzennej UJ: Kraków, Poland, 2013; pp. 105–119. [Google Scholar]
  88. Mróz, F. Pielgrzymki i turystyka religijna w Polsce po transformacji ustrojowej 1989 r. Geogr. Inf. 2014, 2, 124–237. [Google Scholar]
  89. Bik, J.; Stasiak, A. World Youth Day 2016 in the Archdiocese of Lodz: An Example of the Eventization of Faith. Religions 2020, 11, 503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Gonzalez, L.T.V.; Mariz, C.L.; Zahra, A. World Youth Day: Contemporaneous pilgrimage and hospitality. Ann. Tour. Res. 2019, 76, 80–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Mendel, T. Foot-pilgrims and backpackers: Contemporary ways of travelling. Scr. Inst. Donneriani Abo. 2010, 22, 288–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Chang, H.J.; Wang, K.Y.; Lin, S.Y. When backpacker meets religious pilgrim house: Interpretation of oriental folk belief. J. Study Relig. Ideol. 2012, 11, 76–92. [Google Scholar]
  93. Kotze, N.; McKay, T. South Africans Walking the Camino: Pilgrimage or Adventure. Afr. J. Hosp. Tour. Leis. 2020, 9, 997–1011. [Google Scholar]
  94. Ritchie, B.W. Bicycle tourism in the South Island of New Zealand: Planning and management issues. Tour. Manag. 1998, 19, 567–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Lamont, M. Reinventing the wheel: A definitional discussion of bicycle tourism. J. Sport Tour. 2009, 14, 5–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Śledzińska, J.; Włodarczyk, B. (Eds.) Turystyka Rowerowa w Zjednoczonej Europie; Wydawnictwo PTTK „Kraj”: Warsaw, Poland, 2012; pp. 41–63. [Google Scholar]
  97. Nilsson, J.H. Urban bicycle tourism: Path dependencies and innovation in Greater Copenhagen. J. Sustain. Tour. 2019, 27, 1648–1662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Kurek, W.; Mika, M.; Pitrus, E. Formy turystyki kwalifikowanej. In Turystyka; Kurek, W., Ed.; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warsaw, Poland, 2012; pp. 256–278. [Google Scholar]
  99. Buning, R.J.; Gibson, H.J. The role of travel conditions in cycling tourism: Implications for destination and event management. J. Sport Tour. 2016, 20, 175–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Simonsen, P.; Jorgenson, B. Cycle Tourism: An Economic and Environmental Sustainable Form of Tourism? Unit of Tourism Research, Research Centre of Bornholm: Bornholm, Denmark, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  101. Meschik, M. Sustainable cycle tourism along the Danube Cycle Route in Austria. Tour. Plan. Dev. 2012, 9, 41–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Gazzola, P.; Pavione, E.; Grechi, D.; Ossola, P. Cycle tourism as a driver for the sustainable development of little-known or remote territories: The experience of the Apennine regions of northern Italy. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Malchrowicz-Mośko, E.; Młodzik, M.; León-Guereño, P.; Adamczewska, K. Male and female motivations for participating in a mass cycling race for amateurs: The skoda bike challenge case study. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Ritchie, B.W.; Hall, C.M. Bicycle tourism and regional development: A New Zealand case study. Anatolia 1999, 10, 89–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Wearing, S. Volunteer Tourism: Experiences that Make a Difference; Cab: Wallingford, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  106. Wearing, S.; McGehee, N.G. Volunteer tourism: A review. Tour. Manag. 2013, 38, 120–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Guttentag, D.A. The possible negative impacts of volunteer tourism. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2009, 11, 537–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Everingham, P. I’m Not Looking for a Manufactured Experience’: Calling for a Decommodified Volunteer Tourism ’CAUTHE 2017. In Time for Big Ideas-Rethinking the Field for Tomorrow, Paper Presented at the 27th Annual CAUTHE Conference, Dunedin, New Zealand, 7–10 February 2017; The University of Newcastle: Callaghan, Australia, 2017; pp. 7–10. [Google Scholar]
  109. Tomazos, K.; Butler, R. Volunteer tourism: Tourism, serious leisure, altruism or self enhancement? In Where the Bloody Hell are We? Proceedings of the CAUTHE 2008 Conference, Gold Coast, Australia, 11–14 February 2008; Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of Strathclyde: Glasgow, UK, 2008; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  110. McIntosh, A.J.; Zahra, A. A cultural encounter through volunteer tourism: Towards the ideals of sustainable tourism? J. Sustain. Tour. 2007, 15, 541–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Lee, H.Y.; Zhang, J.J. Rethinking sustainability in volunteer tourism. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 1820–1832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Von Rohrscheidt, A.M. Turystyka społeczna—Geneza i istota. Cvncvnvnvn. In Turystyka Społeczna w Polsce. Przewodnik Dobrych Praktyk; Stasiak, A., Ed.; Oficyna Wydawnicza Wierchy: Kraków-Świdnica, Poland, 2021; pp. 15–29. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 14 10514 g001 550
Figure 1. Pillars of sustainable development. Source: Authors.
Figure 1. Pillars of sustainable development. Source: Authors.
Sustainability 14 10514 g001
Sustainability 14 10514 g002 550
Figure 2. Structure of the “umbrella brand” for sustainable tourism. Source: Authors.
Figure 2. Structure of the “umbrella brand” for sustainable tourism. Source: Authors.
Sustainability 14 10514 g002
Sustainability 14 10514 g003 550
Figure 3. Diagram of the links between low-cost tourism and other forms of tourism. Source: Authors.
Figure 3. Diagram of the links between low-cost tourism and other forms of tourism. Source: Authors.
Sustainability 14 10514 g003
Sustainability 14 10514 g004 550
Figure 4. Relationships between “drifting”, tramping, and backpacking. Source: Authors based on [8,41,43,44].
Figure 4. Relationships between “drifting”, tramping, and backpacking. Source: Authors based on [8,41,43,44].
Sustainability 14 10514 g004
Sustainability 14 10514 g005 550
Figure 5. Overlaps in growth factors between youth and backpacking tourism. Source: Authors based on [52,54].
Figure 5. Overlaps in growth factors between youth and backpacking tourism. Source: Authors based on [52,54].
Sustainability 14 10514 g005
Sustainability 14 10514 g006 550
Figure 6. Categories of travel to holy places (in the widest sense). Source: Authors based on [15].
Figure 6. Categories of travel to holy places (in the widest sense). Source: Authors based on [15].
Sustainability 14 10514 g006
Table
Table 1. The elements of the literature review process.
Table 1. The elements of the literature review process.
Stage of Review ProcedureDetails
First stageSelection of the article research question
Second stageSelection of bibliographic databases for the literature analysis
Third stageSelection of specific keywords (terms) and preliminary search of online databases for scientific publications (resulted in 203 different publications)
Fourth stageFurther scaning of the preliminarily selected publications to find the studies most relevant to the article (resulted in 112 publications qualified for the further detailed analysis)
Fifth stageIn-depth review of the selected 112 publications relevant to the topic of this article, synthesis and presentation of the research results
Source: Authors.
Table
Table 2. Structure of the references used in the article.
Table 2. Structure of the references used in the article.
Journal
Papers
JournalNumber of Publications Used in the ArticleResearch FieldFrequency (Issues per Year)
Journal of Sustainable Tourism12Tourism, sustainability12
Annals of Tourism Research6Tourism6
Sustainability9Sustainable development24
Tourism Management4Tourism, management6
International Journal of Tourism Research3Tourism6
Tourism3Tourism2
Current Issues in Tourism2Tourism24
Journal of Sport & Tourism2Sports, tourism4
Tourism Geographies2Tourism, geography5
Turizam2Tourism4
Applied Energy1Energy research
Journal of Horticulture, Forestry and Biotechnology1Horticulture, genetics, plants breeding, plants, forests4
Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia1Economics4
Anatolia1Tourism4
Asien Afrika Latinamerica1Regions of Asia, Latin America, Africa6
Australian Geographer1Geography, regional development4
Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov. Economic Sciences. Series V1Economics, finance, marketing, tourism, management2
Deturope1Regional development, tourism3
Ekonomiczne Problemy Turystyki1Tourism economics4
Folia Pomeranae Universitatis Technologiae Stetinensis. Oeconomica1Economics, social sciences4
Geografické informácie1Economic geography, regional development2
Geojournal of Tourism and Geosites1Geography, tourism4
Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies1Religious studies3
Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management1Tourism, hospitality, management, marketing6
Moravian Geographical Reports1Geography, regional development4
Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift-Norwegian Journal of Geography1Geography, regional development5
Prace Geograficzne1Geography, regional development4
Religions1Religious studies12
Scientific Papers. Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development1Agriculture, rural management and development4
Scripta Instituti Donneriani Aboensis1Religious studies1
Social Research1Social sciences4
The Geographical Journal1Geography, regional development4
Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie1Geography, regional development5
African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure1Hospitality, tourism, leisure5
Tourism Management Perspectives1Tourism management4
Tourism Planning & Development1Tourism development, tourism management, regional development6
Tourism Recreation Research1Tourism, leisure, recreation4
Tourism Review1Tourism6
Tourist Studies1Tourism4
Travel & Tourism Analyst1Tourism6
Journal of Business Research1Business research16
Sustainability Science1Sustainable development6
Ecological Indicators1Environmental studies, sustainable development14
Books
PublisherNumber of publications used in the article
PWN5
CABI3
Chanell View Publication2
PWE2
Routledge2
Springer2
Universe Books1
University of Heidelberg1
UNWTO1
WSTH w Łodzi1
Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Poznaniu1
Wydawnictwo PTTK Kraj1
Earth Policy Institute1
Instytut Geografii i Gospodarki Przestrzennej Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego1
Instytut Geografii i Gospodarki Przestrzennej UJ1
Lanham University Press of America1
Oficyna Wydawnicza Wierchy1
Oxford University Press1
Sage2
Conference papers
PublisherNumber of publications used in the article
Annual CAUTHE Conference2
Unit of Tourism Research, Research Centre of Bornholm1
Websites
https://www.unwto.org/tourism-in-2030-agenda accessed on 1 August 20221
Source: Authors.
Table
Table 3. Relationships between the sustainable tourism pillars and the forms of low-cost tourism.
Table 3. Relationships between the sustainable tourism pillars and the forms of low-cost tourism.
123
Pillars of sustainable tourism according toFeatures of low-cost tourism types responsible for realization of the sustainability pillars presented in column 1Types of low-cost tourism representing the features from column 2
Environmental
  • Respect for nature.
  • Reduction of waste, pollution, and carbon footprint.
  • Optimizing the use of natural environment resources.
  • Use of low-emission transport.
Backpacking
Youth tourism
Cycling tourism
Rural/agritourism
Characteristics
Protecting the sources of raw materials and other natural resources; reduction and assimilation of waste, pollution, and CO2 emmissions; sustaining the biosphere and biological diversity; sustaining the biogeochemical integrity of the biosphere by conservation and responsible use of air, water, and land resources, etc.
Social
  • Striving for authentic tourism experiences based on local tourism assets.
  • Respect for local culture and community.
  • Personal development based on experiences resulting from the relationship between tourists and local communities.
  • Helping poor communities in less developed regions.
Backpacking
Rural/agritourism
Volunteer tourism
Social tourism
Characteristics
Preserving the social and cultural values, identities, relationships, and institutions for the future; upholding human wellbeing in a healthy environment and vibrant economy; sustaining social justice and developing equity among people, regions, and nations, etc.
Economic
  • Using local products apart from the mainstream mass tourism offer.
  • Creation of economic development in peripheral areas (regions, countries).
  • Deglomeration of tourist economy and number of tourists.
  • More sustainable consumption of goods and services.
  • Diversification of the tourist offer.
Backpacking
Youth tourism
Rural/agritourism
Volunteer tourism
Cycling tourism
Social tourism
Pilgrimage tourism
Characteristics
Sustaining economically important natural resources for the use of future generations; prolonging responsible and sustainable economic growth over a long time; sustaining economic well-being at different levels of society and in different regions and localities, etc.
Source: Authors.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Włodarczyk, B.; Cudny, W. Individual Low-Cost Travel as a Route to Tourism Sustainability. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10514. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710514

AMA Style

Włodarczyk B, Cudny W. Individual Low-Cost Travel as a Route to Tourism Sustainability. Sustainability. 2022; 14(17):10514. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710514

Chicago/Turabian Style

Włodarczyk, Bogdan, and Waldemar Cudny. 2022. "Individual Low-Cost Travel as a Route to Tourism Sustainability" Sustainability 14, no. 17: 10514. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710514

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop