Youth: Possible Segment of the Movement for Sustainability in

Tourism

Cosmin Nicolae Mirea

, Alexandra Maria Sârbu

and Puiu Nistoreanu

Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, Piața Romana, Bucharest, Romania

Keywords: Sustainable Development, Sustainable Tourism, Young People.

Abstract: Young people are dynamic, energetic, eager to socialize and to have fun. Based on these considerations, young

people are an important segment of the tourism sector. At the same time, these characteristics can lead to the

practice of unsustainable forms of tourism. The present study aims to highlight whether young people are

prone to sustainable tourism or are in the sphere of influence of overtourism. The study is based on a

questionnaire with 20 questions and a statistical analysis based on calculating the correlation ratio (R -

Multiple R) and the coefficient of determination (R

- R square) between certain dependent variables (tourist

variables) and certain independent variables (socio-economic variables) but also performing a simple

regression.The results indicate that young people are not necessarily followers of sustainable tourism and that

the age is not a variable with a large influence on young people’s tourism preferences.

1 INTRODUCTION

Over time, it has been shown that tourism is a

dynamic phenomenon and a large resource-

consuming industry (human, financial, material, etc).

The dynamic character gives the tourist phenomenon

the possibility to meet the requirements of tourists,

and the consumption of resources is a factor that

brings some difficulties in the proper management of

local resources. Roxas et al. (2020) argue that tourism

stakeholders need to be synergistic on three issues,

namely: rules, living standards and conservation.

Good understanding between stakeholders can limit

the possible negative impact of tourism on resources.

Specialist studies have shown that tourism can

have a social impact in terms of tourist destinations,

manifested by advantages such as increasing the

notoriety of the local community and by

disadvantages such as degradation of the cultural

identity of the local community (Pavlic, Portolan, &

Puh, 2015), but also at the economic level, manifested

by advantages simmilar to increasing the number of

jobs and by disadvantages such as increasing the cost

of living (Minseong & Brijesh, 2018). It should be

noted that both the advantages and disadvantages

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3868-9774

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5715-9061

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8369-7899

generated by the tourist phenomenon can be related

to the number of tourists arriving in a certain tourist

destination, for example: a large number of tourists

contributes to increase the notoriety of the tourist

destination, but at the same time, can contribute to the

degradation of the cultural identity of the local

community. One of the most effective methods of

managing tourist destinations has proven to be the

sustainable development (Gkoumas, 2019), as it

involves managing resources so that the needs of

individuals are met while respecting cultural integrity

and essential living conditions (Sgroi, 2020). Of

particular importance in the management of local

resources are tourists, especially the way they

perceive the consumption of resources.

Through this study we want to highlight the

predisposition of young tourists to practice forms and

activities of sustainable tourism or their membership

in overtourism, starting from the following general

hypotheses: sustainable tourism involves a lower

consumption of local resources than overtourism,

which forces local communities to increase the tariff

of the tourist product; young people prefer more

crowded and low-priced tourist destinations.

Mirea, C., Sârbu, A. and Nistoreanu, P.

Youth: Possible Segment of the Movement for Sustainability in Tourism.

DOI: 10.5220/0010412000720079

In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Finance, Economics, Management and IT Business (FEMIB 2021), pages 72-79

ISBN: 978-989-758-507-4

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Sustainable Development and

Sustainable Tourism

In the age of technological advancement, all

industries must adapt to new expectations and new

consumption patterns. As tourism is one of the most

important sectors of the international economy, it

must have the capacity to respond to the new demands

of individuals, but with the indispensable condition of

managing local resources in a sustainable way. The

activities of "consumption" of tourist resources must

be carried out responsibly, so that both tourists and

local communities have the opportunity to benefit

from those resources in the future.

At the same time, the conservation of local

resources, whether they are local traditions or

elements of the natural environment or other types of

resources, offers the possibility for the local

community to benefit from certain economic

advantages such as new jobs, but also offers unique

experiences for tourists (Cotifava, 2013). The

importance of tourist resources also derives from their

ability to regenerate, in the sense that "renewable

resources come from an infinite stock, and non-

renewable resources come from a finite

stock"(Aluculesei & Nistoreanu, 2013). This

perspective is not only valid for the field of tourism,

but has a sphere of influence on all economic sectors.

The link between resources and sustainable tourism is

indisputable, as resources are one of the variables

underlying the definition of sustainable tourism. In

order to define sustainable tourism, a brief

clarification of the concept of sustainable

development is required. According to the General

Dictionary of the Romanian language, the term

development is assimilated either with a movement

from simple to complex, or with an increase in

proportion of the studied aspects, and the term

sustainable has synonyms such as durable or resistant

(Breban, 1987). The central event in substantiating

the concept of sustainable development is the

establishment of the World Commission on

Environment and Development in 1983, by the

United Nations. The commission was also called

Brundtland because it was named after the Norwegian

prime minister. The Commission produced a famous

report, entitled the Brundtland Report, in which it is

formulated the most comprehensive definition of

sustainable development, namely: "Sustainable

development is the ability of the present generation to

meet their needs without restrict the right of posterity

to meet and satisfy their own needs '' (World

Commission on Environment and Development,

1987). In view of this universally accepted definition,

it can be admitted that the present generation is

directly responsible for the economic and socio-

cultural situation of the future generation. With such

a great responsibility, the current generation must

manage their lifestyle, actions and consumption with

great caution. A pragmatic and optimistic approach to

the concept of sustainable development is offered by

Orecchini (2007) who states that: "sustainable

development does not consume resources, but uses

and reuses them indefinitely". The previous definition

highlights resources and consumption. According to

another approach, sustainable development can be

"the interaction that maintains the balance of

stakeholders' interests and involves the survival of

posterity"(Buzko, Vartanova, Trunina, & Khovrak,

2019). According to this approach, a good

understanding between current stakeholders leads to

the "survival" of the next generation, but this balance

must be correlated with a responsible consumption of

resources.

Gareth (2017) observed that the meaning of

sustainable development varies depending on the

"actor" who interprets the meaning of the concept and

the industry in which it operates. Also, the

implementation of the principles of sustainable

development may differ from one industry to another,

but, what is most important, is the universally

expected effect, namely the improvement of the

quality of life. In the opinion of Buzko et al. (2019)

among the principles of sustainable development are:

maintaining the integrity of ecosystems; potting

natural resources; equal opportunities; social justice

and cultural diversity. A comprehensive set of

principles of sustainable development was also

developed by the United Nations at the 1992 Rio de

Janeiro Conference.

In 2015, at the New York Summit, the United

Nations developed 17 goals on sustainable

development, which Mika (2016) classifies into the

following categories:

a. ,, Primary needs: food, health, water and energy;

b. Equality between people: without poverty,

education, gender equality and reduced

inequalities;

c. Efficiency and sustainable production: economic

growth, innovative industry, responsible

production and consumption, climate action;

d. Endangered landscapes: cities, marine and

terrestrial life;

e. Global cooperation: partnerships, peace and

justice'' (Mika, 2016).

Youth: Possible Segment of the Movement for Sustainability in Tourism

Achieving all the above objectives causes changes on

three essential and specific elements of sustainable

development, namely the economy, the natural

environment and society. This view is also supported

by Mensah (2019) who states that "sustainable

development is based on economic sustainability,

environmental sustainability and social

sustainability", but also by Munasinghe (1993) who

stated that sustainable development can be seen from

three points of view, namely economic, social and

ecological. From this point of view, the field of

tourism falls within the scope of sustainable

development, as it involves economic aspects (jobs,

wages, etc), and environmental issues (natural

resources), but also social aspects (strengthening

cultural identity of tourist destinations, poverty

reduction, etc). Bâc (2013) states that the basis of

sustainable society is the principle of equitable

distribution and democratic participation. The

principle of equitable distribution affects resources,

as it refers to their fair distribution. Democratic

participation is a principle that emphasizes the

importance and need for society / people to take part

in the decision-making process.

In accordance with the definitions of tourism and

sustainable development, the notion of sustainable

tourism has appeared in the literature, in the sense that

this notion can be seen as "the application of the

principles of sustainable development in tourism"

(Bâc, 2013). Given that tourism also has negative

effects on society (erosion of local traditions,

congestion, etc) and the environment (pollution,

irresponsible and continuous consumption of local

resources, etc), we can admit that it was imperative to

find solutions. Against the background of the

negative aspects of tourism, the concept of

sustainable tourism appeared. Bâc (2013) admits that

"sustainable tourism is a reactive notion, which aims

to eradicate the negative impact of tourism". This

approach aims at the goal of sustainable tourism. A

holistic approach to defining the concept is provided

by the World Tourism Organization and the United

Nations Environment Program, which have

formulated the following definition: "Sustainable

tourism is the type of tourism that focuses on its

present and future socio-economic situation"(United

Nations Environment Programme and World

Tourism Organization, 2005). The two international

authorities highlighted the fact that sustainable

tourism falls under the umbrella of sustainable

development, through the prism of tourists, industry,

environment and communities that fall into the main

components of sustainable development: economy,

society and environment.

All forms of tourism can enter the sphere of

sustainable tourism (Ioan, Rădulescu, & Cojocea,

2012), but there are also several distinct forms,

including ecotourism, rural tourism, pro-poor-

tourism (Bâc, 2013). In addition to these forms of

tourism, other ones have been studied in the literature,

for example volunturism, which in recent years has

seen an upward trend (Pompurova, Marcekova,

Sebova, Sokolova, & Zofaj, 2018)or cultural tourism,

which Zoran (2018) concludes that "is a form of

tourism that educates people about the history, art and

architecture of a tourist destination." Also, Zargham

(2007) considers that cultural tourism is one of the

most intense forms of sustainable tourism, because

through the interest of tourists for this form of tourism

is stimulated the reconditioning of historical vestiges.

The study of sustainable tourism indicators is not

a new topic in the literature. Given the fact that

sustainable tourism can be approached through the

prism of sustainable development pillars (economic,

social, environmental), its indicators can be

categorized according to these pillars, a special

importance having the environmental pillar. For

example, Lozano-Oyola et al. (2012) includes in the

environmental pillar several indicators of sustainable

tourism, including: ,, percentage of protected areas,

percentage of energy consumption from renewable

sources, amount of waste produced at a destination,

density of buildings, noise level during the day , the

number of tourists in an area etc''.

2.2 Overtourism

From an economic point of view, the numerous

tourist flows have advantages for local entrepreneurs,

at least in terms of revenues. That is the reason why

most local entrepreneurs show a positive attitude

towards tourists and make considerable efforts to

increase their number. At the same time, the large

number of tourists from a tourist destination brings

advantages for the local population, in the sense that

a large number of tourists generates the need for staff,

which leads to new jobs. This is an optimistic

approach to the impact that tourism can have on a

tourist destination, but there is also a pessimistic

approach that can be described in terms of the concept

of overtourism.

According to the World Tourism Organization,

overtourism is "the impact that tourism has on a

tourist destination and that negatively influences the

quality of life of residents and the experiences of

tourists"(World Tourism Organization, 2018). By

comparison, overtourism is the antithesis of

sustainable tourism, as the latter positively influences

FEMIB 2021 - 3rd International Conference on Finance, Economics, Management and IT Business

the quality of life of residents, while overtourism has

negative influences on both residents and tourists. A

concise definition of the concept of overtourism is

provided by Avond et al. (2019), namely: "the

presence of many tourists in the same place at the

same time". However, overtourism is not limited to

the large number of tourists and their distribution in

space and time, but rather refers to the effect of their

behavior and actions. Zmyslony, Kowalczyk-Aniol

and Dembinska (2020) evoke, based on the literature,

several effects of overtourism, including "changes in

the structure of local trade, congestion, pollution and

waste, violation of fundamental laws, etc". These

effects lead to higher prices and tariffs, higher

amounts of waste, higher resource consumption,

noise, irritation of residents and difficulties for local

authorities to manage congestion. Drapela (2020)

claims that rural areas are also affected by

overtourism, the main reason being that tourists

choose well-known destinations. And other

authors(Gowreesunkar & Seraphin, 2019)consider

that overtourism is a danger to well-known

destinations. Causes of overtourism include the press,

low tariffs and prices in certain destinations,

hospitality of hosts, free crossing of the border,

expansion of technological equipment, successful

promotion campaigns, different opinions and

interests of the local community (Gowreesunkar &

Seraphin, 2019). At first sight, it can be admitted that

the aspects mentioned above bring only advantages,

but they are also the basis for generating overtourism.

2.3 Youth and Forms of Manifestation

of Tourist Demand

From a theoretical point of view, there is a form of

tourism specific to young people, even called youth

tourism, and Minciu (2004) places it in the sphere of

social tourism, which defines as follows: ,,form of

tourism specific to people with modest incomes,

which involves facilities such as tariff reductions,

subsidies, etc''. In the case of young people, the

financial component is often a disadvantage, but they

have the advantage of the physical component and

various aspects of the social component, such as

knowledge of foreign languages, ability to adapt

quickly, openness to the new, etc.

The World Tourism Organization attributes the

following characteristics to young people:

 ,, Adventurous;

 Sociable and willing to interact with other young

people;

 They want to travel and experience new areas;

 They have low incomes, but they have free time;

 They travel for long periods'' (World Tourism

Organization; World Youth Student and

Educational Travel Confederation, 2016).

In this regard, tourist units must pay special attention

to the online promotion. According to law no.

350/2006 called the Youth Law, in Romania, young

citizens are consideredto have the agebetween 14 and

35 years(The Romanian Parliament, 2006).

In 2015, the arrivals of young tourists accounted

for 23% of all international arrivals ( World Youth

Student and Educational Travel Confederation,

2015). It seems that young tourists are an important

segment in the structure of global tourist demand.

Moisă (2010) argues that the tourist demand from the

segment of young tourists differs from other types of

demand, through the following aspects: "high degree

of mobility, length of stay, various reasons for travel,

budget allocated to travel". Regarding the allocated

budget, at the level of 2014, a young tourist spent on

average 1591 euros for tourism(World Tourism

Organization; World Youth Student and Educational

Travel Confederation, 2016). Moisă (2010) mentions

that most of the budget goes to the transport service

(40%), then to the accommodation service (18%), the

food service (15%), the leisure service (12%), other

services (15%). This allocation fully reveals the low

level of the travel budget for young tourists.

Being characterized by dynamism, it can be said

that young tourists practice all forms of tourism, but

in close connection with their reasons for travel there

are several forms of tourism that they practice mainly,

including educational tourism, volunteering, sports

tourism, tourism adventure

and work and travel

programs (Moisă, 2010). This point of view is

also supported by Demeter and Brătucu (2014)

who came to the conclusion that “young

European tourists are interested in cultural

exchanges and volunturism, while young

Romanian tourists are interested in work and

travel programs, tourism and leisure, adventure

and sports tourism''. According to the forms of

tourism mentioned above, several travel reasons

for young tourists can be deduced, including

relaxation and fun, studies and service. In other

words, the reasons for young people's travel can

be framed in four dimensions: knowledge,

challenge, escape and novelty (Blomgren &

Ljungstrom, 2018).

The segment of young tourists has a great

potential for development and therefore, the tourism

authorities and the providers of tourist services should

pay more attention to the needs of young people, so

Youth: Possible Segment of the Movement for Sustainability in Tourism

as to contribute to their socio-professional

development and channel them to practice forms of

sustainable tourism.

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The research is based on the application of a

questionnaire among young people who are members

of a student association and among two classes of

high school students. The questionnaire contains 20

questions and was distributed through the online

survey platform between October 24 and November

6, 2020.

The aim of this study is to find out if young

tourists are willing to practice sustainable tourism. In

this sense, a response grid was developed, based on

the study of the literature. Also, in order to achieve

the goal, two research questions were formulated:

There is a correlation between the dependent

variables: travel reasons (preference for visiting

highly publicized tourist attractions) - A; the types of

tourism practiced - B; the types of transport

(preference for using one's own car or relatives on

tourist trips - C, and independent variables (monthly

income - W, level of education - X, place of origin -

Y, occupation - Z) and to what extent the variables

dependents mentioned are influenced by age.

 Hypothesis 1: Most young people choose well-

known and crowded destinations;

 Hypothesis 2: Young people are not interested in

local products (dishes, traditions, etc);

 Hypothesis 3: Young people attach great

importance to low tariffs in tourist destinations.

Simple regression was used to answer these research

questions, and the Regression function in Microsoft

Office Excel was used as the method for calculating

simple regression.

Table 1: Response grid - sustainable consumption vs non-

sustainable consumption.

Sustainable tourism Overtourism

Preference for less

publicized, less known

tourist destinations

Preference for mediated

tourist destinations (known

nationally and or

internationally)

Local dishes

Industrialized culinary

preparations

Knowledge of the local

community and its traditions

and observation of nature

Visiting known tourist

attractions

Increased attention to

resource consumption

Lack of attention to resource

consumption

Adapting the behavior

according to the situation in

the tourist destination

Adopting common or

asuperior behavior

Use of public transport and

less polluting: train, bus

Use of own means of

transport

Making expenses within the

local community

Tracking prices and low

tariffs

The classification of young tourists in the sphere

of sustainable tourism or in the sphere of overtourism

is made according to the answers that occupy the first

position.

4 RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by 136 young

people. The socio-economic profile of the young

people surveyed is as follows:

Table 2: Profile of respondents.

Characteristic Percentage of respondents

They come from urban areas 71.3%

Their monthly income is

between 1-1000 lei

48.5%

Most are pupils and students 76.4%

Most are between 19-25

years old

53.7%

Most graduated from high

school

38.2%

Most of them are female 60.6%

As mentioned above, only the responses that

occupied the first position in the preferences of young

people were taken into account. Following the

application of the questionnaire, we obtained the

following answers:

Table 3: Respondents' answers.

Nr. Crt. Answer %

Most young people are largely informed

about local traditions and laws before

visiting a particular tourist destination.

39.7

Most young people usually visit nationally

known destinations

59.6

Most of the young people would spend

their stay in the city of Cluj-Napoca.

40.4

Among the reasons for travel, the visit of

highly publicized tourist attractions ranks

first in the preferences of young people.

Most of the young people practice rural

tourism and cultural tourism.

31.6

FEMIB 2021 - 3rd International Conference on Finance, Economics, Management and IT Business

Table 3: Respondents' answers (cont.).

Nr. Crt. Answer %

When traveling for tourism, young people

most often use their personal or relatives

car.

Most young people are slightly influenced

by local traditions and the local community

in choosing a tourist destination.

39%

Most of the young people visit well-known

tourist attractions when they go on

vacation.

41.2

Most young people prefer local dishes

when they go on vacation.

75.7

Most young people take into account the

amount of electricity and water consumed

in the accommodation units.

43.4

For most young people, when they go on

vacation, the people who accompany them

are the most important aspect.

Most young people responded that when

they are in a tourist destination they try to

adapt their behavior according to the local

situation.

51.5

The following table shows the classification of the

answers according to the proposed answer grid:

Table 4: Framing the answers.

Nr. Crt Sustainable tourism Overtourism

1 Answer 1

2 Answer 2

3 Answer 3

4 Answer 4

5 Answer 5

6 Answer 6

7 Answer 7

8 Answer 8

9 Answer 9

10 Answer 10

11 Answer 11

12 Answer 12

Total 5 7

According to the answers, it can be seen that

young people are not prone to sustainable tourism, as

they prefer crowded and mediated tourist destinations

such as Cluj-Napoca or Brasov and mostly use their

own means of transport, which means that the first

hypothesis is confirmed. Young people also prefer

local dishes, but are not interested and not influenced

by local traditions, which is why hypothesis 2 is

partially confirmed.

Although most of the young people do not have a

monthly income higher than 1000 lei, they do not

position the low tariffs from a destination as the main

reason to travel, nor do they attach high importance

to this aspect when visiting a tourist destination,

which means that hypothesis 3 is refuted.

Following the application of the Regression

function between the dependent variables and the

independent variables, we obtained the following

results:

Table 5: Correlation ratio (R) and coefficient of

determination (R

Variable W X Y Z

0.10 **

0.18 **

0.06 *

0.09 *

0.01 0.03 0.003 0.009 R

0.20 **

0.18 **

0.09 *

0.19 *

0.04 0.03 0.008 0.03 R

0.07 *

0.18 **

0.003 *

0.13 *

0.006 0.03 0.000009 0.01 R

* statistically significant; ** statistically insignificant

The fisher test was used to test the significance of

the correlation ratio. According to the previous table,

there is a weak correlation between the environment

of origin (Y), occupation (Z) and the reasons for

travel (A). The same happens in the case of the types

of tourism practiced (B). Also, there is a weak

correlation between the monthly income (W), the

environment of origin (Y), the occupation (Z) and the

means of transport used (C). In other words, young

people do not choose the reasons for travel,types of

tourism and means of transport based on monthly

income, level of education, environment of origin or

occupation, which means that young people are

influenced by other variables when making decisions

about on a possible tourist trip. Thus, a simple

regression between the age of the respondents was

applied, as an independent variable and the dependent

variables mentioned. Following the calculations in

Excel, we obtained an invalid regression model

between age and types of tourism and a valid model

between age and preference for visiting highly

publicized tourist attractions, but also between age

and preference for using your car in travel for

tourism.

Thus, the first model is:

Y = 0.26 + 0.15 a

e ran

e + ei (1)

where Y is the preference for visiting highly

publicized tourist attractions and ei are the errors.

Youth: Possible Segment of the Movement for Sustainability in Tourism

Thus, as the age increases by one interval, the

preference for visiting tourist attractions will increase

by 0.15 units. Since the coefficient of determination

between the two variables is 0.04, we can say that 4%

of the variation of the preference for visiting highly

publicized tourist objectives is explained by the

variation of age.

The second model is:

Y = 0.24 + 0.13 a

e ran

e + ei (2)

where Y is the preference of using one's own car or

that of relatives in tourist trips and ei are the errors.

Thus, as the age increases with an interval, the

preference of using one's own car or that of relatives

in tourist trips will increase by 0.13 units. Since the

coefficient of determination between the two

variables is 0.02, we can say that 2% of the variation

of the preference of using one's own car or that of

relatives in tourist trips is explained by the variation

of age.

5 CONCLUSIONS

Due to the fact that young people prefer to visit more

crowded tourist destinations, it can be admitted that

they are part of mass tourism. Another aspect that

removes young people from practicing sustainable

tourism is the preference for using a personal car or

that of relatives when traveling for tourism. Also, the

weak correlation between the dependent variables,

the independent variables and the weak influence of

age on the studied dependent variables strengthen the

premise according to which young people are

spontaneous and dynamic people. Thus, the tourist

behavior of young people is influenced quite a bit by

the independent variables used in this study, which is

determined precisely by the dynamic and

spontaneous nature of young people.

In essence, based on the responses received and

the statistical links between the variables, young

people tend not to be advocates of sustainable

tourism, but it is not appropriate to say that they are

not willing to practice sustainable tourism, as their

preferences are dynamic, spontaneous and in some

places contradictory.

6 THE LIMITS OF RESEARCH

The present research could be affected by the

heterogeneity of the sample, as the young people who

responded are pupils, students, employees or

households. The research may also be affected by the

fact that many closed questions have been used. A

possible research topic would be why young people

put more emphasis on the people who accompany

them and less on tourism activities or the local

community.

REFERENCES

Aluculesei, A. C., & Nistoreanu, P. 2013. The importance

of harnessing natural resources through health tourism

in Romania. Competitiveness of Agro-Food and

Environmental Economy (pg. 118-127). Bucureşti:

Faculty of Agro - Food and Environmental Economics

- Bucharest University of Economic Studies.

Avond, G., Bacari, C., Limea, I., Seraphin, H.,

Gowreesunkar, V., & Mhanna, R. 2019. Overtourism: a

result of the Janus-faced character of the tourism

industry. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes,

552-565, vol. 11, nr. 5.

Bâc, D. P. 2013. Tourism and Sustainable

Development:Realities. Challenges. Opportunities.

Bucharest: Economic Publishing House.

Blomgren, E., & Ljungstrom, S. 2018. Youth Tourism –

Impacts on places from a consumer perspective.

Disponibil la<www.diva-portal.org: https://www.diva-

portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1182217/FULLTEXT02>

[accesat la 21 octombrie 2020].

Breban, V., 1987. General Dictionary of the Romanian

lenguage. Bucharest: Didactic and Pedagogical

Publishing House.

Buzko, I., Vartanova, O., Trunina, I., & Khovrak, I. 2019.

Theoretical aspects of regional sustainable

development in the EU and Ukraine. SHS Web of

Conferences. Les Ulis: EDP Sciences.

Cotifava, F. 2013. Field research of sustainable tourism:

economic assumptions to development of sustainable

tourism. International Journal for Responsible

Tourism, 64-87, vol. 2, nr. 2.

Demeter, T., & Brătucu, G. 2014. Typologies of Youth

Tourism. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of

Braşov , 115-122, vol. 7 (56), nr. 1, Seria V.

Drapela, E. 2020. Overtourism in the Czech Sandstone

Rocks: Causes of the Problem, the Current Situation

and Possible Solutions. International Conference on

Tourism Research (pg. 35-41). Liberec: Academic

Conferences International Limited.

Gareth, A. 2017. Constructing definitions of sustainable

development. Smart and Sustainable Built

Environment, 34-47, vol. 6, nr. 1.

Gkoumas, A. 2019. Evaluating a standard for sustainable

tourism through the lenses of local industry. Heliyon,

e02707.

Gowreesunkar, V., & Seraphin, H. 2019. Introduction:

What smart and sustainable strategies could be used to

reduce the impact of overtourism? Worldwide

Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 484-491.

FEMIB 2021 - 3rd International Conference on Finance, Economics, Management and IT Business

Ioan, I., Rădulescu, C. V., & Cojocea, B. I. 2012. Forms of

sustainable tourism. Calitatea: Acces la Success (pg.

75-81, vol. 13, nr. 3). Bucharest: Romanian Society for

Quality Assurance.

Lozano-Oyola, M., Blancas, F. J., Gonzalez, M., &

Caballero, R. 2012. Sustainable tourism indicators as

planning tools in cultural destinations. Ecological

indicators, 659-675, vol. 18.

Mensah, J. 2019. Sustainable development: Meaning,

history, principles, pillars, and implications for human

action: Literature review. Cogent Social Sciences, 1-21,

vol. 5, nr. 1.

Mika, J. 2016. Challenges for meteorology in the

sustainable development goals (2015-2030). Air and

Water. Environmental Components (pg. 1-8). Cluj-

Napoca: Babes Bolyai University Faculty of

Geography.

Minciu, R. 2004. Tourism Economy. Bucharest: Uranus

Publishing House.

Minseong, K., & Brijesh, T. 2018. Factors that Influence

Residents’ Support for Environmental Development

along the Haeparang Trail, South Korea. Journal of

Park and Recreation Administration, vol. 36 , 166-175.

Moisă, C. 2010. Aspects of the youth travel demand.

Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica,

vol. 12, nr. 2.

Munasinghe, M. 1993. Environmental Economics and

Sustainable Development. World Bank Environment

Paper nr.3 , Washington DC.

Orecchini, F. 2007. A "measurable" definition of

sustainable development based on closed cycles of

resources and its application to energy systems.

Sustainability Science, 245-252, vol. 2, nr. 2.

Pavlic, I., Portolan, A., & Puh, B. 2015. The social impacts

of tourism on local community's quality of life. Tourism

in Southern and Eastern Europe, Vol. 3, 259-272.

Pompurova, K., Marcekova, R., Sebova, L., Sokolova, J.,

& Zofaj, M. 2018. Volunteer Tourism as a Sustainable

Form of Tourism—The Case of Organized Events.

Sustainability, vol. 10, nr. 5.

Roxas, F. M., Rivera, J. P., & Gutierrez, E. L. 2020.

Mapping stakeholders’ roles in governing sustainable

tourism destinations. Journal of Hospitality and

Tourism Management, 387-398.

Sgroi, F. 2020. Forest resources and sustainable tourism, a

combination for the resilience of the landscape and

development of mountain areas. Science of the Total

Environment, vol. 736, 139539.

The Romanian Parliament. 2006. Youth Law no. 350/2006.

Bucharest, Romania: Official Gazette, Part I, no. 648 of

July 27, 2006.

United Nations Environment Programme and World

Tourism Organization. 2005. Making tourism more

sustainable. A guide for policy makers. Madrid: United

Nations Environment Programme and World Tourism

Organization.

World Commission on Environment and Development.

1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment

and Development: Our Common Future. Oslo: World

Commission on Environment and Development.

World Tourism Organization. 2018. ‘Overtourism’?

Understanding and Managing Urban Tourism Growth

beyond Perceptions. Madrid: World Tourism

Organization.

World Tourism Organization; World Youth Student and

Educational Travel Confederation. 2016. Afilliate

Members Global Reports, Volume thirteen - The Power

of Youth Travel. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.

World Youth Student and Educational Travel

Confederation. 2015. Youth and student travellers age

15 to 29 represent 23% of international tourist arrivals.

Disponibil la <https://www.wysetc.org/

2015/09/youth-and-student-travellers-age-15-to-29-

represent-23-of-international-tourist-arrivals/>[accesat

la 10 octombrie 2020].

Zargham, H. 2007. Sustainable tourism development and

handicrafts in the developing world. WIT Transactions

on Ecology and the Environment, 1011-1017, vol. 102.

Zmyslony, P., Kowalczyk-Aniol, J., & Dembinska, M.

2020. Deconstructing the Overtourism-Related Social

Conflicts. Sustainability, vol. 12, nr. 4.

Zoran, R. 2018. Cultural tourism as a unique form of

sustainable tourism - cultural resources as tourism offer

factors. Zbornik Radova Ekonomskog Fakulteta u

Istocnom Sarajevu, 63-71, nr. 17.

Youth: Possible Segment of the Movement for Sustainability in Tourism