This article was downloaded by: [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries]On: 22 December 2014, At: 08:30Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Click for updates

Journal of Sustainable TourismPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsus20

Toward sustainable educational travelJoshua Longa, Alison Vogelaarb & Brack W. Halec

a Southwestern University, Environmental Studies, 1001 E.University Blvd., Georgetown TX 78626 United Statesb Franklin College Switzerland, Communication and Media Studies,Lugano, Switzerlandc cFranklin College Switzerland, Environmental Science, Lugano,SwitzerlandPublished online: 30 Jul 2013.

To cite this article: Joshua Long, Alison Vogelaar & Brack W. Hale (2014) Towardsustainable educational travel, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22:3, 421-439, DOI:10.1080/09669582.2013.819877

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.819877

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2014Vol. 22, No. 3, 421–439, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.819877

Toward sustainable educational travel

Joshua Longa∗, Alison Vogelaarb and Brack W. Halec

aSouthwestern University, Environmental Studies, 1001 E. University Blvd., Georgetown TX 78626,United States; bFranklin College Switzerland, Communication and Media Studies, Lugano,Switzerland; cFranklin College Switzerland, Environmental Science, Lugano, Switzerland

(Received 20 August 2012; final version received 12 June 2013)

In the past decade, sustainability and global citizenship have emerged as two of the mostprominent themes in contemporary higher education. Literature that specifically mergesthe two themes has, however, lagged behind. This paper integrates the literature from thefields of sustainable tourism and educational travel in order to articulate relevant conceptsand to summarize theoretical and empirical approaches for improving the sustainabilityof educational travel programs. While most of the literature focuses upon carbon-relatedissues, a more comprehensive assessment and implementation would focus on the threedimensions of sustainability: economic, environmental, and socio-cultural. This paperadvocates several practical measures, such as the incorporation of sustainability intoprogram mission statements, the training of travel leaders in all three dimensions ofsustainability, and the implementation of sustainability-related assessment measuresfor educational travel programs. Further, we argue that maintaining critical scholarlyengagement with broader theoretical frameworks is necessary to contextualize thesepractical and empirical approaches, and to reassess the potential benefits and negativeimpacts associated with educational travel.

Keywords: educational travel; study abroad; sustainability; global citizenship; eco-citizenship; higher education

In the past decade, institutions of higher education (IHEs) have emerged as important locifor the advancement, scholarly engagement, and practice of (environmental) sustainability.However, the sizeable ecological footprint of university operations presents a noteworthycontradiction between the rhetoric and practice of sustainability. One example of thiscontradiction lies in the increasing growth of educational travel programs, such as studyabroad. Although these programs often aim to promote global citizenship and sustainability,they also have large carbon footprints and can negatively impact the economies, cultures,and ecosystems of their destinations. While recent scholarly publications have identifiedpotential challenges associated with such programs, studies that adequately address theirimpacts are less common and only recently emerging. Additionally, only a few studies serveas models for future research. Finally, little evidence suggests that scholarship on this topicis being sufficiently read across disciplinary and institutional boundaries – an importantconsideration given the ubiquity of educational travel programs at IHEs. Because botheducational travel and sustainability practices are interdisciplinary topics, it is importantto bring together the scholarship from different disciplines to establish a clear agendafor assessment and implementation of sustainable practices in university-level educational

∗Corresponding author. Email: jlong@southwestern.edu

C© 2013 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

422 J. Long et al.

travel. This paper reviews current scholarship from the fields of sustainable tourism andeducational travel to:

(1) establish a clear definition of sustainable educational travel and its related terms;(2) synthesize perspectives from the sustainable tourism and the educational travel

literatures to address the current state of sustainable practices and summarizeimportant theoretical and empirical approaches relevant to this emerging field;

(3) offer insight into some of the logistical, curricular, and assessment strategies forimproving the sustainability of educational travel programs;

(4) offer recommendations for the development of a research agenda that advancespractical and theoretical approaches to sustainable educational travel.

Definition of terms

Before summarizing the literature, it is important to clarify several terms used in thispaper: sustainability, global citizenship, educational travel, and study abroad. Overuseand misappropriation has given sustainability multiple meanings. For reviews of thesemeanings, we recommend WCED (1987), Lele (1991), Sneddon, Howarth, and Norgaard(2006), and Paton (2008). For this study, we follow a definition derived from Brown, Hanson,Liverman, and Merideth (1987), where sustainability involves economic, environmental,and/or socio-cultural responsibilities; concerns both the natural and human worlds; andultimately “. . . will encourage and support the sustainable use of the biosphere and equitableresource use” (718).

Our use of global citizenship borrows from Hanson (2010, p. 80), who defines a globalcitizen as one who is “involved locally, nationally, and internationally; is conscientious,informed, and educated about issues; exhibits environmental and social responsibility;advocates alongside the oppressed; or lives by the dictum, ‘Be the change you want to seein the world’.”

The terms educational travel and educational tourism (often used interchangeably)require some qualification. A widely cited definition of educational tourism from Bodger(1998) includes any program in which “participants travel to a location as a group with theprimary purpose of engaging in a learning experience directly related to that location” (28).Ritchie, Carr, and Cooper (2003) add that educational travel/tourism involves overnightstays at a destination and has the objective of educating students about sustainable travel toreduce negative impacts. For this paper, we use educational travel in the context of IHEs.

The term study abroad falls under the umbrella of “educational travel”, and it has tra-ditionally implied an educational travel program that required students to take up residencein a foreign destination. However, study abroad has since come to encompass various ed-ucational opportunities outside a student’s home country, including short stay programs,long-term residence programs, internships, service learning programs, and other special-ized programs (Engle & Engle, 2003). Because this paper focuses on travel programs inhigher education, we recognize that the terms study abroad and educational travel can beused interchangeably and our usage reflects this.

Building upon these definitions, we suggest a definition of sustainable educational travelas student travel undertaken as a part of university/college curriculum that recognizes andstrives to minimize the negative economic, socio-cultural, and environmental effects oftravel and to maximize the potential beneficial effects.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 423

The drive for green and global institutions

North American IHEs have an ambiguous relationship with sustainability. On one hand,IHEs have long been at the forefront of sustainable discourse and practice. IHEs are livinglaboratories for eco-friendly construction, design, and sustainable living, with universitiesimplementing initiatives to decrease carbon footprints, conserve water resources, promotebiodiversity, and reduce waste (Silvia, 2008). They are also important spaces for sustainabil-ity research (Beringer & Adomßent, 2008), pedagogy and curriculum development (Rowe,2002) and action (Barlett & Chase, 2004). University programs are also reaching beyondcampus, forging partnerships to implement environmental practices and promote sustain-ability (Allen-Gil, Walker, Thomas, Shevory, & Elan, 2005; Molnar, Heller, & Solecki,2011). Nevertheless, IHEs consume significant quantities of energy, water, and chemicalswhile producing wastewater, solid waste, and even hazardous waste. Some universitiesproduce greenhouse gas emissions comparable with many small USA cities (Knuth, Nagle,Steuer, & Yarnal, 2007) and have multiple ecological impacts on surrounding communities(Klein-Banai & Theis, 2011; Venetoulis, 2001).

Just as IHEs are rushing to showcase sustainability initiatives, many are also placingemphasis on internationalization and the promotion of global citizenship among their stu-dents (Altbach & Knight, 2007). Numerous institutions incorporate principles of globalcitizenship into their mission statements, curricula, and core values (Lewin, 2009; Tarrant,2009). One rationale for this movement stems from the globalization of business and theincreased employability of workers with international experience (Sjoberg & Shabalina,2010; Jong, Schnusenberg, & Goel, 2010). Additionally, the literature on global citizenshipsuggests that international experience provides students with a greater sense of interculturalunderstanding, social justice and equity, self-awareness, and environmental literacy (Bel-lamy & Weinberg, 2006; Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingrich, 2002; Parker, Wade, & Atkinson,2004).

The integration of educational travel programs is a widely utilized strategy for promotingglobal citizenship at IHEs, and policy shifts at the government and institutional levelssuggest that this trend will continue (Altbach & Knight, 2007; Tarrant, 2009). Citing themany benefits of student international travel, a USA bipartisan report (CALSAFP, 2005)recently announced the goal of sending abroad one million USA students annually by 2015,stating:

Promoting and democratizing undergraduate study abroad is the next step in the evolution ofAmerican higher education. Making study abroad the norm and not the exception can positionthis and future generations of Americans for success in the world . . . Study abroad should beintegral to undergraduate education. (3)

Similarly, the USA Secretary of Education’s Partnership for Global Learning challengesthe USA to “launch a new era of international engagement”, and calls upon universityadministrators to “advance foreign language proficiency” and “continue to encourage ourstudents to study abroad” (Duncan, 2010).

Such promotional rhetoric is widespread on North American campuses. As Lewin(2009) states, in a global age providing opportunities for USA students to have an “inter-national experience is no longer just the interest of individual students. It has now becomea priority of the collective” (8). Consequently, educational travel programs have becomemore popular (Altbach & Knight, 2007; Duffy, 2009; Engle & Engle, 2003). USA studentparticipation in study abroad has grown by 150% in the past two decades (Jong et al., 2010;Open Doors, 2011), and the number of international students enrolling in USA institutionshas increased by 32% since 2000 (Open Doors, 2011). These students represent a significant

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

424 J. Long et al.

number of future international travelers, and the knowledge gained during educational travelwill inform their ability to exemplify sustainable practices as global citizens (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingrich, 2002; Paige, Fry, Stallman, Josic, & Jon, 2009; Tarrant & Lyons, 2012).

Despite the related ideological underpinnings of sustainability and global citizenship,it is difficult to reduce an institution’s ecological footprint while simultaneously expandingeducational travel. As Dvorak et al. (2011, p. 143) point out, while IHEs strive to becomeboth global and green, there are “contradictions and tensions between these goals, inparticular when we consider the carbon emissions involved in international activities likestudy abroad”. At the same time, there is potential synergy between these two movements,and, as this paper suggests, the process of “greening” study abroad programs would improvetheir legitimacy and efficacy as a tool for fostering responsible global citizens.

Review of the literature: connecting educational travel and sustainable tourism

Despite practical and discursive overlaps between the fields of sustainable tourism andeducational travel, few scholars draw from both fields to critically engage the issue ofsustainability in educational travel. Only two recent peer-reviewed publications directlyrelate the issue of sustainability in study abroad programs with the goal of institutionalchange (Dvorak, Christiansen, Fischer, & Underhill, 2011; Hale, Vogelaar, & Long, inpress). We build upon these articles with perspectives from other disciplines to provide acomprehensive look at the current state of sustainability within educational travel.

Our literature review was purposefully broad in scope: we included peer-reviewedscholarly articles, government reports and institutional/organizational publications. Usinga textual snowball sampling technique to locate relevant sources (Babbie, 2010), we beganwith a keyword search in five electronic databases (EBSCO Host Academic Search Com-plete, Google Scholar, JSTOR, Science Direct, and Springer Link) and then mined the mostrelevant bibliographies to seek out additional related, widely cited, and influential sources.Whenever possible, the entire record and text were included in each search, meaning thatany record with search terms in the abstract, keywords, title, subject headings, and withinthe text were queried and identified.

Study abroad and educational travel: slow progress toward sustainability

Although educational travel has a long history, modern travel programs sponsored by IHEsare relatively recent phenomena, and the incorporation of sustainable practices into studyabroad is even more recent. The popularity of study abroad and the introduction of newmodels have created an educational travel landscape with a range of “choices in programfocus, destination, duration, participant preparation, and ideal outcome” (Engle & Engle,2003, p. 2). Consequently, a large body of literature examines assessment, learning out-comes, and pedagogical efficacy of the programs. This includes case studies on programdevelopment (Harris, Murray, & Urbaczewski, 2011), student satisfaction with the learn-ing experience (Wang, Taplin, & Brown, 2011), the pedagogy of intercultural sensitivity(Myers, Hill, & Harwood, 2005; Pedersen, 2009, 2010), and perspectives on duration ofstay and program effectiveness (Dwyer, 2004; Sjoberg & Shabalina, 2010; Wynveen, Kyle,& Tarrant, 2012).

The importance of study abroad in promoting global citizenship, personal growth,intellectual development, and intercultural learning is a prominent theme in these studies(e.g., McKeowan, 2009). In contrast, other scholars discuss financial, familial, physical, andpsychological obstacles that students face (Jong et al., 2010; Naffziger, Bott, & Mueller,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 425

2008; Soneson & Cordano, 2009). They also address complications from schedule conflicts,curricular challenges, health and safety issues, and administrative oversights (Harris et al.,2011; Shackelford, 2011). Other studies have examined the effects of study abroad onstudent environmental attitudes and intercultural sensitivity (Rexeisen & Al-Khatib, 2009;Wynveen et al., 2012).

Another major concern is with the impact on host communities. Schroeder, Wood,Galiardi, and Koehn (2009) examined the effects of short-term study abroad programson host communities, while Cusick (2008) explored the potential incorporation of UnitedNations Education for Sustainable Development goals into the curricula of environmentallyfocused study abroad programs. Both Reilly and Senders (2009) and Palacios (2010)questioned the influence of Western perspectives and behaviors in host regions, and tomitigate this, Reilly and Senders introduced a self-reflexive model (“critical study abroad”)that directly challenges IHEs to measure the legitimacy of study abroad programs againsttheir own rhetoric of global citizenship.

These articles indicate a movement toward merging the discourses of sustainabilitywith study abroad. However, they do not provide a practical framework for assessing studyabroad or implementing sustainable practices. Dvorak et al. (2011) appears to be the firstpeer-reviewed publication directly focused on the connections between study abroad andsustainable practices. Their paper accomplished three important goals:

(1) identifying study abroad as an ideal target for achieving IHE goals of sustainabilityand internationalization;

(2) presenting tangible examples of sustainable study abroad to serve as potentialmodels for several disciplines;

(3) offering broad suggestions for international educators, faculty, and IHEs that mayhelp improve the sustainability of such programs.

Similarly, a second peer-reviewed publication by Hale, Vogelaar, and Long (in press)surveyed current practices among study abroad travel leaders and program coordinators,and provided a first glimpse into the general state of sustainable practices in educationaltravel programs. They identified several important patterns:

(1) a notable disparity between sustainable discourse and practice in study abroadprograms;

(2) individuals, not institutions, are generally driving current best practices in studyabroad;

(3) emerging strategies that may facilitate the implementation of sustainable practicesare not readily accessible in the academic literature.

Connecting educational travel and sustainable tourism

Although educational travel is a form of tourism and can affect destinations in various ways,surprisingly little study abroad research draws from the sustainable tourism literature, whichhas much to contribute.1 Below, we detail the potential negative economic, socio-cultural,and environmental impacts of educational travel addressed in the literature (summarized inTable 1). A similar table could be developed for tourism’s potential positive consequencesfor sustainable development.

The economic impacts of tourism are well documented (e.g. Ardahaey, 2011;Mathieson & Wall, 1982; Patterson, Gulden, Cousins, & Kraev, 2004; Theobald, 2005;

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

426 J. Long et al.

Table 1. Negative impacts associated with travel.

Environmental Economic Socio-cultural

Excessive solid and humanwaste production

Unbalanced increase in jobs andrevenue in tourism sector

Tourist invasion of “backstage”areas

Degradation of naturalareas

Increased foreignownership/Leakage of revenuesout of host region

Tourist behaviors that maythreaten local cultural norms

Excessive use of scarceresources

Resource scarcity and degradationfor host communities

Tourist participation indisruptive behaviors

Increased pollutionCrowding and increased

trafficIntroduction of non-native

species

Localized infrastructuredevelopment for host region

Uncertain access to improvedinfrastructure for locals

Indigenous cultures exploitedand commoditized formarketing and branding oftourist experience

Vogel, 2001). Economic growth has encouraged tourism’s use as a model of develop-ment (Shah, McHarry, and Gardiner, 2002), and much research examines tourist-generatedeconomic activity (Ardahaey, 2011; Hall & Page, 2006; Mathieson & Wall, 1982; Pattersonet al., 2004). Tourist activity affects the primary tourism sector of host destinations (i.e.lodging, food industry, transportation, amusement, and retail trade) and industries that sup-port hotels, restaurants, and retail (Ardahaey, 2011; Patterson et al., 2004). In developingregions, these effects can be more pronounced, such as the “induced impacts” that occur dueto increased wages of those employed in the tourist industry (Archer, Cooper, & Ruhanen,2005; Ardahaey, 2011). Indeed, the economic impacts of tourism reverberate through mul-tiple levels of an economy (Ardahaey, 2011; Shah et al., 2002). Additionally, much activitytakes place in the informal economy, making exact measurements of economic impacts inmany destinations a complex task (Ardahaey, 2011; Hall & Page, 2006).

The economic effects also link directly to the physical environment and livelihoods of thedestination communities. The development of new facilities and infrastructure for tourismmeasurably impacts the resources and ecosystems of the visited region. Local communitiesoften carry the burdens of degraded environments and resource scarcity without sharing thebenefits that accompany such developments (Archer et al., 2005; Patterson et al., 2004; Shahet al., 2002). Critical perspectives on tourism’s economic impacts have much to contribute toresponsible destination selection and travel planning for study abroad, but they are lackingin the educational travel literature.

The socio-cultural impacts of study abroad are also underrepresented. This discoursetends to focus on socio-cultural benefits gained by students during such experiences,whereas the sustainable tourism literature has examined ways in which tourists’ unfa-miliarity with, and lack of knowledge about, local beliefs, traditions, and customs cancause adverse impacts (Archer et al., 2005; Cole, 2007; Marion & Reid, 2007). Perceptionsof these cultural values are further complicated by the marketing or branding of a touristdestination. This can lead to homogenizing stereotypes, and can create an exoticized viewof indigenous populations who are often expected to act out “traditional” performancesfor tourists (Hall & Page, 2006; Pomering & White, 2011). These perceptions can alsoaffect the demarcation of “authentic” versus tourist space, creating complex landscapesfor cultural commoditization, insensitivity, and locally undesirable behavior (Archer et al.,2005; Brunet, Bauer, Lacy, & Tshering, 2001; Shah et al., 2002). Indeed, the designation oftourist and local space is an important concept in the literature. According to Weaver (2006),

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 427

travel destinations can be understood through Goffman (1959) and MacCannell’s (1976)metaphor of the frontstage and backstage. Frontstages are spaces intended and managed fortourists, while backstages are spaces where locals live and work. As Weaver argues, whentourists venture into backstage spaces, their actions have a greater tendency to become moreunsustainable or culturally insensitive. Further, while on vacation, some tourists are morelikely to engage in undesirable behaviors and crimes (i.e. drug use, gambling, prostitution,and vandalism) in travel destinations than at home (Archer et al., 2005).

While the above scholars highlight negative impacts, others maintain a critical perspec-tive, suggesting that the role of tourism in promoting modern values and social progress canbe a positive force (Liu, 2003). Additionally, multiple works address the complex nature oftourist activity on gender relations (Kinnaird & Hall, 1996; Williams, 2002), pre-existingsocial relationships and values (Archer et al., 2005; Shah et al., 2002; WCPA, 2002), andlocal quality of life (Archer et al., 2005).

Perhaps the most perplexing gap in the educational travel literature is the lack of criticalengagement with environmental sustainability. Alternative forms of tourism (particularlyecotourism) were traditionally touted as a way to increase awareness of environmentalissues and encourage the protection of biodiverse regions (Hill & Gale, 2009). But scholarshave also been pointing to the complexity of the industry’s environmental impacts forat least three decades (see Mathieson & Wall, 1982). For instance, early on McKercher(1993) identified tourism as an industrial activity with heavy resource dependency, wastedisposal issues, and specific infrastructure requirements. Indeed, tourism remains a growing,multi-faceted global industry with cross-border economic and environmental effects – anissue that makes governance and policy making a complex task (Bramwell & Lane, 2011;McKercher, 1993). Moreover, while individual tourist impacts on the environment can seeminsignificant, aggregate effects are often substantial. Tourists’ reputation for trampling,littering, resource overuse, and waste disposal permeates the literature (e.g. Gossling,Borgstrom Hansson, Horstmeier, & Saggel, 2002; Hall & Page, 2006; WCPA, 2002). Inmany destinations, it can be difficult for visitors to avoid environmental degradation. Manytourist destinations are located in sensitive ecological areas, and travelers find themselvesengaging in destructive activities in areas that were never suitable for tourist traffic (Archeret al., 2005; Hillery, Nancarrow, Grifin, & Syme, 2001).

These activities degrade natural ecosystems and frequently put tourists in direct com-petition with local populations for resources. Further, what were once local impacts arecollectively becoming global-scale issues. Recent studies indicate that tourism now ac-counts for an estimated 3.5%–5.5% of species loss and as much as 14% of all greenhousegas emissions, primarily from transport and accommodation (Hall, 2011; Scott & Becken,2010; Scott, Peeters, & Gossling, 2010). These issues may intensify, as tourism is likely togrow 4%–7% annually (McKercher, Prideaux, Cheung, & Law, 2010).

Despite significant environmental impacts associated with tourism, positive aspectsalso exist. Stronza (2007) argues that in addition to economic incentives for conservation,workers involved in ecotourism develop new values and social relations that empower localcommunities and encourage environmentally responsible behavior. Other research suggeststhat tourism remains an avenue for local engagement and empowerment through openlines of communication with host communities, particularly when they are involved in theplanning process (Cole, 2006; McIntosh & Zhara, 2007). Additionally, such new forms ofalternative tourism as volunteer and service tourism are providing opportunities for researchand environmental action (Ellis, 2003; Higgins-Desbiolles, 2008; Wearing, 2004).

In summary, an established body of literature details the economic, socio-cultural,and environmental impacts of tourism, and has significant relevance for educational travel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

428 J. Long et al.

programs. Many of the impacts are explored critically and present serious concerns forprograms striving to promote sustainability and the ideals of global citizenship. However,there are also potential benefits from sustainable tourism practices, and further research isneeded to assess the efficacy of both practical and theoretical frameworks. The followingsections outline strategies for improving sustainability in educational travel, and explorepractical and theoretical avenues for future studies.

Measures for enhancing sustainability in educational travel programs

The scholarly literature contains both descriptive studies (which evaluate programs at spe-cific institutions) and prescriptive studies (which provide strategies and models to helpstakeholders). Most peer-reviewed research focuses on environmental sustainability, par-ticularly climate-related impacts. An IHE’s complex organizational dynamics (Stephens &Graham, 2010), involving unique carbon inventories (Srinivasamohan & Lee, 2010), and adiversity of study abroad program types (Hale, Vogelaar, & Long, in press) and disciplinaryframeworks (Selby, 2006), means it is challenging to create a template for evaluating thesustainability of educational travel. Nonetheless, in this section, we provide an overview ofideas and approaches used to mitigate the negative impacts of educational travel programsand to maximize the potential benefits to student travelers and destination communities. Wefocus on three areas: program logistics, curricular and co-curricular design, and programmission and assessment (see Table 2 for a summary).

Program logistics and mitigation strategies

Much of the effort to address sustainability in educational travel programs occurs at thelevel of program logistics. Logistical measures allow programs to “walk the talk” whiledemonstrating sustainable practices to students and educating them about the many facets oftravel. The most important logistical features include choice of transportation, destinationselection, and the choice of food and lodging at the destination.

Table 2. Best practices for making educational travel more sustainable.

Category Strategies and approaches

Logistics/mitigation • Reducing carbon emissions by minimizing air and car travel• Employing carbon offsets• Selecting destinations that minimize negative impacts• Choosing low-impact lodging, food, and transportation• Incorporating sustainability into curricula and student learning goals

Curricular/- • Selecting relevant destinations for teaching sustainabilitycurricular • Employing pedagogical tools (e.g., journals, footprint calculators) that

emphasize self-evaluation and individual responsibility• Pre-travel education regarding intercultural sensitivity, especially cultural

attitudes, norms, and history specific to destination• Providing professional development for program staff• Employing a code of ethics or voluntary guidelines concerning behavior• Developing program mission statements that reflect principles of

sustainabilityProgram • Employing carbon and ecological footprint analyses

mission and • Developing post-travel assessment tools that measure studentassessment engagement with sustainable practices and concepts

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 429

The carbon footprint associated with transportation, particularly air travel, is a majorconcern for educational travel programs (Scott et al., 2010). Several strategies exist forimproving the sustainability of air travel. Groups and individuals should fly direct when theoption is available (Kollmuss & Bowell, 2007), and should remember that they sometimeshave the option to select airlines with lower carbon emissions (Miyoshi & Mason, 2009;Weaver, 2006). Also, light rail, bus, and train transportation are more efficient comparedto either car or air transport (Bamford, 2004). Further, longer durations (e.g. semester orlonger) in less carbon-intensive destinations may be preferable as they can compensatefor emissions from long-distance travel (Hunter & Shaw, 2007). Finally, transportation atthe destination should focus on public transportation, walking, or biking (Bamford, 2004;Dvorak et al., 2011; Hale, Vogelaar, & Long, in press).

Regardless of duration of stay or means of transportation, carbon offsets are often aprescription for reducing the footprint of a travel program. Ideally, a traveler buys offsetscommensurate with the damage caused by one’s emissions, and the funds go toward projectsthat provide carbon sinks or invest in energy efficiency/renewable energy schemes thatprevent additional emissions (Gossling et al., 2007; Kollmuss & Bowell, 2007). Whileavailable from third-party providers, offsets can also be developed at the institutionallevel (Srinivasamohan & Lee, 2010). Dvorak et al. (2011) discuss a program assignmentthat requires students to calculate and track their carbon footprint for the trip, and thenencourages them to reduce their emissions at home by an equivalent amount. Certainly,carbon offsets are not without critique. Some studies suggest that offsets may discourageresponsible behavior, allowing travelers to “buy the right” to pollute. Also, not all carbonoffsets are created equal (Kollmuss & Bowell, 2007). Many providers use different carboncalculators and invest in different offset schemes, with varying levels of legitimacy. Gosslinget al. (2007) point out that reforestation schemes, for example, involve a significant time lagbetween the time of carbon emission (the travel) and the time of total uptake (forest growth),meaning that the complete sequestration of the emitted carbon may take 20–100 years. Withatmospheric carbon dioxide levels recently surpassing 400 ppm for the first time in humanhistory, waiting years to realize emissions reductions may not be a sustainable option.Finally, carbon offsets do nothing to mitigate other environmental impacts of travel.

A significant portion of a travel’s impact occurs at the destination, and so choosinga sustainable location for a program is important. This may include travel to less eco-logically vulnerable areas, but it may also mean that program coordinators choose moresustainable locations, such as ecovillages, sustainable campuses, and other places featuringsustainable infrastructure and design (Dvorak et al., 2011; Leggett, 2012; Tarrant & Lyons,2012). Several articles cite rating systems and organizations (e.g. terrapass.com and car-bonfootprint.com) that help leaders select locations based upon their sustainability trackrecord. Choosing accommodation with eco-certification can be helpful, as is choosing localproviders rather than global chains (Jackson, 2010). Food selections that focus upon local,in-season, and culturally appropriate options also improve a program’s sustainability.

Scholars and international institutions also advocate activities at the site that respectlocal cultures and issues. A 2009 UNESCO-sponsored paper highlighted community well-being and the “strengthening of social and cultural patterns” ( Gebhard, Meyer, & Roth,2009b, p. 19). Another paper from this series recommends training for industry leaders, hostbusinesses, and tour guides/travel leaders (Gebhard, Meyer, Parkyn, Rohacand, & Roth,2009a). Weaver (2006) provides several strategies for demarcating the aforementionedfrontstage and backstage of a site in order to reduce ecological footprints. While thisliterature is largely geared toward the mainstream tourism industry, it also has mer-its for travel program leaders, as a program itinerary may take students through front-,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

430 J. Long et al.

back-, and intermediate “stages”. Choosing activities to minimize a trip’s backstage pres-ence may increase sustainability and safety while reducing negative social and economicimpacts.

Curricular and co-curricular design

Several articles and programs suggest that the incorporation of sustainability into a pro-gram’s curriculum can help balance environmental impacts, as students gain lessons thatencourage them to live more sustainably in the future. Although most travel programs donot explicitly examine issues related to sustainability, some suggest that it can have broadappeal (Blewitt & Cullingford, 2004). Dvorak et al. (2011, p. 161) state:

Courses, regardless of discipline, could, with a little imagination and creativity, include specificenvironmental or climate change assignments (for example, a medieval history course couldinclude an assignment comparing the carbon footprint of a medieval person and a modern dayperson. An English course could include reflective essays on the impact of climate change onthe region visited).

Even without explicit incorporation, study abroad can influence sustainable behaviors,a principle Dvorak et al. (2011) call “collateral learning”. They suggest that students ontravel programs experience new cultures with different, sometimes less resource-intensive,ways of living. Further, study abroad programs present situations where students live out ofsuitcases with less access to energy, water, and goods. Thus, students learn different waysof living, both in terms of environmental impacts and attitudes. Indeed, Paige et al. (2009)found that former study abroad participants generally lead simpler, less resource-intensivelives than people who had not studied abroad. With respect to short-term study abroad,Wynveen et al. (2012, p. 348) found “a stronger relationship between students’ perceivedresponsibility for the environment and their personal obligations to reduce their negativeimpacts on it after their study abroad experience”. Notably, Wynveen et al. also mentionthe influence of experienced travel leaders who employ specific pedagogical strategies toachieve sustainable learning outcomes.

Program leaders facilitate this type of learning through curriculum that actively edu-cates students about different practices, through discussion and reflections about students’experiences, and through the modeling of best practices in the program (Ritchie et al., 2003;Wynveen et al., 2012). Duffy (2009) recommends using a code of ethics, a set of voluntaryguidelines regarding traveler behavior. In the field of educational travel, the Green PassportProgram and the Leave No Trace Program each provide guidelines for students study-ing abroad. Educating students about, and exposing them to, these programs represents animportant tool, and serves as a reminder of the links between global citizenship and sustain-able practices. Duffy (2009) also suggests the use of “visitor education programs”, whichstrive to reduce negative impacts that result from a lack of awareness or knowledge. AsMarion and Reid (2007) state, “. . . these programs have different names (Leave No Trace,Codes of Conduct, Environmental Guidelines for Tourists) but share common objectives:to sustain opportunities for high-quality visitor experiences while avoiding or minimiz-ing associated negative impacts to protected area resources, visitor experiences, and parkneighbors” (2007:5). Done well, education programs encourage visitors to consider theirimpacts while allowing visitors to retain their freedom of choice (Marion & Reid, 2007).These programs are most commonly associated with national parks or other protectedareas, but are applicable elsewhere. Though the Leave No Trace program (LNT.org) “hadits origins in wilderness and backcountry settings, it has grown to include frontcountry

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 431

(urban/suburban) environments and is widely applied in USA protected areas” (Marion &Reid, 2007, p. 7).2

Destination selection also has implications for learning outcomes and curricular devel-opment, especially as they relate to environmental awareness and sustainability. Thoughmany studies assert or imply this relationship, fewer systematically examine the functionof location on learning and curricular development. Tarrant & Lyons’s (2012) study ofthe effect of short-term study abroad experiences on environmental citizenship foundprovisionally that location does influence students’ environmental citizenship. Nakagawaand Payne (2011) found that place and sense of place were key components in study abroadstudents’ experiences, and thus they advocate a place-responsive pedagogy/environmentaleducation that considers the implications of sites on student experiences of and in a place.Dvorak et al. (2011, p. 151) recommend learning from communities and individuals“deeply engaged in environmental work . . . whose whole lifestyle and culture reflecteddramatically different sets of relationships to the natural world”. They also highlight theimportance of selecting destinations with “particular relevance to the discussion of climatechange” (156). And finally, Leggett (2012, p. 43) cites the pedagogical significance oftravel in the developing world to help “students understand the urgency and complexity ofsuch issues as environmental degradation, overpopulation, and non-sustainable growth –both at home and abroad”.

Program mission and assessment

Surprisingly few studies discuss official commitments or mission statements regardingsustainability in educational travel programs, and those that do discuss this also note thatuniversity-level commitments to sustainability (e.g. the American College and UniversityPresident’s Climate Commitment) have not found their way to the programmatic level. Duffy(2009) identifies the university mission statement as an important place to start. With an in-tentional statement, programs and IHEs would convey the message that sustainable practicesare a worthwhile goal, and they would incorporate measures to assure their implementation.A handful of organizations and IHEs have begun to make such commitments. For example,the Forum on Education Abroad’s (2011) most recent Standards of Good Practice supportsustainability with the inclusion of a (brief) section on environmental and social responsi-bility. Additionally, Middlebury College has made an explicit commitment to sustainableeducational travel through a program called Sustainable Study Abroad (Leggett, 2012).

There is also a shortage of sustainability assessment in educational travel programs.Some studies have advocated for program-wide eco-audits and/or carbon footprint analyses(Dvorak et al., 2011, Srinivasamohan & Lee, 2010; Tripoli, 2010). Others, such as Hunterand Shaw (2007), suggest a “net ecological footprint” model, a useful tool that accountsfor differences in impact between student lifestyles at home and their actions abroad.Ultimately, if programs and institutions are not explicitly addressing sustainability in theirmission statements, and if there is no framework for assessment, then steps taken to improvethe overall sustainability of a program will remain intermittent and largely invalidated.

Recommendations and future research

According to Dvorak et al. (2011), the sustainability of study abroad programs can be viewedfrom three perspectives. The first is that the educational value of study abroad experiencesoutweighs the environmental costs associated with travel. The second is that, in an era ofclimate change and widespread environmental degradation, the heavy environmental costs

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

432 J. Long et al.

of study abroad cannot be justified. The final perspective states that the justification for studyabroad programs rests on two considerations: “the overall carbon footprint of the program,and the ability of the course content to provide skills and inspire change in students” (146).We support this last perspective, but would expand it beyond carbon footprint to include theecological, economic, and socio-cultural impacts of a program. To facilitate future efforts,we offer three practical recommendations that encourage dialogue across institutional anddisciplinary boundaries about sustainability within educational travel. We recognize thatthese recommendations must occur alongside continued research, and so we end this sectionwith suggestions for future studies.

First, we recommend travel programs adopt a mission statement that clearly recognizesand advocates economic, socio-cultural, and environmental sustainability. The articulationof such mission statements must be inclusive of all stakeholders on and off campus, andnecessitates an open dialogue to formulate its goals. Once incorporated into its mission, aprogram must develop and employ assessment protocols to encourage implementation andvalidate sustainability measures.

Second, we recommend professional development programs to educate program leadersand administration about the impacts of educational travel and sustainable options. Suchprograms are uncommon (see exceptions in Cusick, 2008 and Wynveen et al., 2012). Webelieve that most travel leaders and administrators would benefit from training in the theoryand practice of sustainability based upon the experience and research of those practitionerswho are involved in sustainable travel/tourism. Such training may encourage the integrationof sustainability concepts and practices into travel curricula.

Finally, we recommend the implementation of a program proposal and review processthat explicitly examines sustainable practices. As discussed above, the choice of traveldestination and logistics are closely tied to a trip’s impacts, and as some have noted, theefficacy of sustainability education is often linked to the efforts of the travel leader toincorporate these concepts into the curriculum (Wynveen et al., 2012). Program proposalsshould (1) require consideration of the ecological, socio-cultural, and economic impacts oftheir travels, and (2) consider opportunities for integrating sustainability concepts into thecurriculum. The proposal review process should require travel leaders, program coordina-tors, and administration to engage in meaningful dialogue about these issues and requirean assessment process that measures a trip’s sustainability and pedagogical effectiveness.

The successful implementation of these recommendations must coincide with ongoingresearch that addresses specific gaps in the literature and explores frameworks for under-standing changes in the tourism industry. The absence of a clearly articulated researchagenda may be a key reason for the shortage of scholarly research that combines sustain-ability and educational travel. Below, we propose an agenda for the coming years. We dividethis agenda broadly into “impacts” and “practices” (summarized in Table 3).

Comprehensive assessment of educational travel impacts is an important first step.Assessment tools geared toward the environmental impacts of tourism certainly exist (e.g.carbon footprint and water footprint calculators). However, metrics that examine the broaderecological footprint of travel are as yet underdeveloped for educational travel or are inac-cessible to a broader audience.3 Further, it is necessary to consider travel’s diverse andinterconnected influences on ecosystems in light of socio-cultural dynamics and broaderissues of political economy. With this in mind, it is important for future research to developcomprehensive frameworks for measuring the impacts of educational travel through bothquantitative models (i.e. carbon and water footprints, economic impact, pollution, etc.) andconceptual frameworks (i.e. host–guest exchange, cultural commoditization, transformativelearning, local empowerment, migration/mobility, etc.).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 433

Table 3. A research agenda for sustainable educational travel.

Research area Research questions

ImpactsGeneral • How do impacts from short-term versus long-term programs differ?

• How do local partnerships affect program impacts?• How do the issues of mobility and migration complicate traditional

notions of sustainable travel and tourism?• Will technological advancements or increasing social awareness of

sustainability issues create a shift in current trends?

Environmental • What tools can be used to assess and compare the varying ecologicalimpacts of study abroad courses?

Economic • How do travel programs influence and support local economies?• How can we assess these impacts both locally and in the context of

broader political economic structures?

Socio-cultural • What measures or frameworks exist, or can be developed, to assess thesocio-cultural impacts on the host destination?

• What measures or frameworks exist, or need to be developed, to assessthe pedagogical impacts on student travelers?

Current practicesGeneral • What types of partnerships (e.g., communities, business) exist?

• Who makes the decisions about travel partnerships, destinations, andfunding?

• How can mission statements best support sustainability in travelprograms?

• How do we implement offsets in ways that are most meaningful?• What ideals of cultural and natural heritage do academic travel programs

support and/or neglect?

Destination • Which destinations are most frequented? Are they sustainable?• How do institutions choose regions to study in?• Do travel programs spend more time in front or backstages? Is the

framework of front- and backstages explicit and/or useful in this context?

Pedagogy • Which pedagogical tools and models support sustainable practices intravel programs?

• How do we measure “collateral learning”?• What types of sustainable lifelong learning practices take place, and do

these match up with the ideals of global citizenship?• How do these practices differ across program types, destinations, lengths?

Another important area for research is within academic institutions themselves. Wehave summarized some of these findings, but much is still unknown. Studies that exploreadministrative commitments and partnerships associated with educational travel may revealmore about how management at the institutional level either mitigates or exacerbatesimpacts. Additionally, the pedagogical benefits of educational travel require further criticalinvestigation. This paper has reviewed some of the more promising scholarship on thistopic, but more research is needed in light of the emergent popularity of new models oftourism (i.e. volunteer and service tourism, justice tourism, etc.). Many of these are highlyapplicable for educational travel programs, but as some authors have noted (Coghlan &Gooch, 2011; Higgins-Desbiolles, 2008; McIntosh & Zhara, 2007) there is a need forfurther examination of their impacts on both travelers and destination communities.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

434 J. Long et al.

Finally, it is important to emphasize the evolving nature of the tourism industry inthe era of neoliberal globalization and the implications this has for future research. Thispaper has focused largely on the advancement of practical and empirical approaches, butthe efficacy of these measures requires ongoing theoretical engagement with the broaderframeworks of technological advancement, human mobility, and political economy. AsWilliams (2013) notes, the dynamics of migration and mobility have shifted dramatically,creating new pathways that both influence and evolve within the boundaries of changingmarket conditions, technological advancements, and state intervention. As a result, activitiesonce seen as path-dependent developments in tourism infrastructures, policies, and practicescan be subject to reinvention, agency, and reorientation. In a similar vein, alternative modelsof tourism specifically aimed at global justice and the empowerment of marginalizedcommunities have shown a remarkable tendency to be co-opted and “greenwashed” bythe commercial tourism industry, reminding us that even small-scale altruistic efforts canbe subsumed by broader forces (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2008). Both Williams and Higgins-Desbiolles remind us of the challenges of creating a formalized set of sustainable bestpractices, and suggest that programs and travel leaders must carefully weigh the trade-offsin order to justify educational travel and also weigh the outcomes of a trip. In short, webelieve that while there are clear steps that can be taken to improve the sustainabilityof educational travel, continued critical engagement is needed in order to minimize thenegative impacts, maximize the benefits, and bolster the credibility and efficacy of thisform of travel.

Conclusion

Sustainability and global citizenship have emerged as two prominent themes in contempo-rary higher education, but critical scholarship that connects educational travel – a frequentlyused mechanism to enhance global citizenship – to institutional sustainability greatly lagsbehind the rapid growth of these programs. Given their recent growth and popularity, it isnecessary to revaluate the role of educational travel in student learning and institutionaldevelopment. If IHEs use educational travel to develop global citizens, they cannot overlookthe significant ecological, socio-cultural, and economic footprints of such programs. Thegreening of educational travel reinforces the ideals of global citizenship while providing apractical outlet for those ideals. Likewise, it allows IHEs to address what are perhaps theirmost significant global impacts. In this way, the greening of study abroad programs legit-imizes the rhetoric of both the sustainability and global citizenship movements, and providesa timely opportunity to (re)define what we mean by a successful educational travel program.

In this paper, we provide a set of potential best practices for sustainable educationaltravel, as well as recommend the incorporation of sustainability into program missionstatements, the training of travel leaders in all three dimensions of sustainability, and theimplementation of sustainability-related assessment measures for travel programs. We alsorecognize that continued critical engagement with theoretical frameworks is necessaryin order to contextualize and evaluate educational travel’s negative impacts and potentialbenefits. We hope that that this paper encourages fellow researchers, travel leaders, andadministrators to advance scholarship and practices that promote the sustainability andpedagogical efficacy of university educational travel.

AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank the editors and reviewers of the Journal of Sustainable Tourism for theirhelpful recommendations.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 435

Notes1. For an introduction, we recommend Hardy et al. 2002; Lu & Nepal 2009; Harris et al. 2002;

Weaver 2006; Hall & Page 2006.2. Other resources include: Greenpassport.org, a pledge service and online community; the Rising

Green blog, a web community for young environmentalists with a section about study abroad;350.org, an online resource facilitating campaigns, grassroots organizing, and mass public actionsto reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and GoAbroad’s Innovation in Sustainability award.

3. For example, Hunter and Shaw (2007) provide a broader conceptualization of “net ecologicalfootprint” that may prove applicable to educational travel, but this connection has not beenaddressed in the literature.

Notes on contributorsJoshua Long has a PhD in human geography from the University of Kansas. He is an assistantprofessor of Environmental Studies at Southwestern University where he serves as co-adviser of theSouthwestern Community Garden and also sits on the University Talloires Committee. His researchinterests include sustainable tourism, sustainable food and agriculture, and urban political ecology.He has coordinated/led student travel to destinations in Italy, Switzerland, and England.

Alison E. Vogelaar has a PhD in communication from the University of Colorado, Boulder. She is anassistant professor of communication and media studies at Franklin College Switzerland where shealso co-directs the Center for Sustainability Initiatives. Her research interests include environmentaldiscourses, the rhetoric of social movements, and sustainable educational travel. She also leads ayearly academic travel program to Scotland that focuses upon the themes of folk culture, tourism,representation, and sustainability.

Brack W. Hale has a PhD in land resources from the Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies atUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison. He is currently an associate professor of biology and environmentalscience at Franklin College Switzerland and co-director of the Center for Sustainability Initiatives atFranklin. His research interests include sustainability issues in higher education, particularly in regardto the environmental impacts of educational travel programs. He also regularly leads educationaltravels through Franklin’s Academic Travel program, having taken students to destinations in Europeand Latin America.

ReferencesAllen-Gil, S., Walker, L., Thomas, G., Shevory, T., & Elan, S. (2005). Forming a community part-

nership to enhance education in sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in HigherEducation, 6(4), 392–402.

Altbach, P.G., & Knight, J. (2007). The Internationalization of higher education: Motiva-tions and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 290–305.doi:10.1177/1028315307303542

Archer, B., Cooper, C., & Ruhanen, L. (2005). The positive and negative impacts of tourism. In W.F.Theobald (Ed.), Global tourism (pp. 79–102). Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Ardahaey, F.T. (2011). Economic impacts of tourism industry. International Journal of Business andManagement, 6(8), 206–216. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v6n8p206

Babbie, Earl. (2010). The practice of social research (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage.Bamford, C. (2004). Sustainable transport and logistics: Vision or reality? In J. Blewitt & C.

Cullingford (Eds.), The sustainability curriculum (pp. 141–156). London: Earthscan.Barlett P.F., & Chase G.W. (Eds.). (2004). Sustainability on campus: Stories and strategies for change.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Bellamy, C., & Wineberg, A. (2006). Creating global citizens through study abroad. The Journal of

the New England Board of Higher Education, 21(2), 20–21.Beringer, A., & Adomßent, M. (2008). Sustainable university research and development: Inspecting

sustainability in higher education research. Environmental Education Research, 14(6), 607–623.doi:10.1080/13504620802464866

Blewitt, J., & Cullingford, C. (Eds.). (2004). The sustainability curriculum (p. 257). London:Earthscan.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

436 J. Long et al.

Bodger, D.H. (1998). Leisure, learning, and travel. Journal of Physical Education, 69, 28–32.Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2011). Critical research on the governance of tourism and sustainability.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4–5), 411–421. doi:10.1080/09669582.2011.580586Brown, B.J., Hanson, M.E., Liverman, D.M. & Merideth Jr., R.W. (1987). Global sustainability, toward

definition. Environmental Management, 11, 713–719.Brunet, S., Bauer, J., De Lacy, T., & Tshering, K. (2001). Tourism development in Bhutan:

Tensions between tradition and modernity. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9(3), 243–263.doi:10.1080/09669580108667401

Cole, S. (2006). Information and empowerment: The keys to achieving sustainable tourism. Journalof Sustainable Tourism, 14(6), 629–644.

Cole, S. (2007). Implementing and evaluating a code of conduct for visitors. Tourism Management,28(2), 443–451.

Coghlan, A. & Gooch, M. (2011). Applying a transformative learning framework to volunteer tourism.Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(6), 713–728.

Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program. (2005). Global competenceand national needs. Retrieved from http://www.aplu.org/document.doc?id=190

Cusick, J. (2008). Study abroad in support of education for sustainability: A New Zealand case study.Environment, Development and Sustainability, 11(4), 801–813. doi:10.1007/s10668-008-9144-5

Duffy, L.N. (2009). The University of North Carolina at Greensboro Study Abroad Stu-dents’Preparation for and Participation in Sustainable Tourism Practices (Master’s thesis). Uni-versity of North Carolina, Greensboro.

Duncan, A. (2010). International engagement through education. Speech presented to the Councilon Foreign Relations Meeting, released 26 May 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2012, fromhttp://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2010/05/05262010.html

Dvorak, A.M.W., Christiansen, L.D., Fischer, N.L., & Underhill, J.B. (2011). A necessary partnership:Study abroad and sustainability in higher education. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal ofStudy Abroad, XXII, 143–167.

Dwyer, M.M. (2004). More is better: The impact of study abroad program duration. Frontiers: TheInterdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, X, 151–163.

Ellis, C. (2003). Participatory environmental research in tourism: A global view. Tourism RecreationResearch, 28(3), 45–55.

Engle, L., & J. Engle. (2003). Study abroad levels: Toward a classification of program types. Frontiers:The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, IX, 1–20.

Forum on Education Abroad. (2011). Standards of good practice for education abroad (4th ed.).Carlisle, PA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.forumea.org/standards-index.cfm

Gebhard, K., Meyer, M., Parkyn, M., Rohacand, J., Roth, S. (2009a). Sustainable Tourism: Trainingthe Trainers Programme. Venice: Ecological Tourism in Europe (ETE) and UNESCO RegionalBureau for Science and Culture in Europe (BRESCE).

Gebhard, K., Meyer, M., and Roth, S. (2009b). Criteria for Sustainable Tourism. Venice: EcologicalTourism in Europe (ETE) and UNESCO Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe(BRESCE).

GoAbroad Innovation Awards - GoAbroad News. (n.d.). Retrieved July 12, 2012, fromhttp://www.goabroad.com/news/goabroad-innovation-awards

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.Gossling, S., Borgstrom Hansson, C., Horstmeier, C., & Saggel, S. (2002). Ecological footprint

analysis as a tool to assess tourism sustainability. Ecological Economics, 43, 199–211.Gossling, S., Broderick, J., Upham, P., Ceron, J.-P., Dubois, G., Peeters, P., & Strasdas, W. (2007).

Voluntary carbon offsetting schemes for aviation: Efficiency, credibility and sustainable tourism.Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(3), 223–248. doi:10.2167/jost758.0

Hale, B.W., Vogelaar, A.E., & Long, J. (in press). A-Broad Spectrum: Sustainability in educationaltravel. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 14(4).

Hall, C.M. (2011). Policy learning and policy failure in sustainable tourism governance: From first-and second-order to third-order change? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4–5), 649–671.doi:10.1080/09669582.2011.555555

Hall, C.M., & Page, S.J. (2006). The geography of tourism and recreation: Environment, place, andspace. London: Routledge.

Hanson, L. (2010). Global citizenship, global health, and the internationalization of curriculum: Astudy of transformative potential. Journal of Studies in International Education, 14(1), 70–88.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 437

Hardy, A., Pearson, L., & Merz, S.K. (2002). Sustainable tourism: An overview of the concept andits position in relation to conceptualisations of tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(6),475–496.

Harris, A.L., Murray, M.C., & Urbaczewski, A. (2011). Study abroad as an education experience:Challenges, realizations, and lessons learned. Communications of the AIS, 28, 17–30.

Harris, R., Williams, P., & Griffin, T. (2002). Sustainable tourism: A global perspective (2nd ed.).Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Higgins-Desboilles, F. (2008). Justice tourism and alternative globalisation. Journal of SustainableTourism, 16(3), 345–364.

Hill, J., & Gale, T. (Eds.). (2009). Ecotourism and environmental sustainability: Principles andpractice. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

Hillery, M., Nancarrow, B., Grifin, G., & Syme, G. (2001). Tourist perception of environmentalimpacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), 853–867.

Hunter, C., & Shaw, J. (2007). The ecological footprint as a key indicator of sustainable tourism.Tourism Management, 28(1), 46–57. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.07.016

Jackson, L.A. (2010). Toward a framework for thecomponents of green lodging. Journal of Re-tail & Leisure Property, 9(3), 211–230. Nature Publishing Group. Retrieved from http://www.palgravejournals.com/rlp/journal/v9/n3/abs/rlp20106a.html

Jong, P.D., Schnusenberg, O., & Goel, L. (2010). Marketing study abroad programs effectively: Whatdo American business students think? Journal of International Education in Business, 3(1/2),34–52. doi:10.1108/18363261011106876

Kinnaird, V., & Hall, D. (1996). Women and tourism - theoretical writing. Tourism Management,2(17), 96–102.

Klein-Banai, C., & Theis, T.L. (2011). An urban university’s ecological footprint and the effect ofclimate change. Ecological Indicators, 11(3), 857–860. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.11.002

Knuth, S., Nagle, B., Steuer, C., & Yarnal, B. (2007). Universities and climate change mitiga-tion: Advancing grassroots climate policy in the US. Local Environment, 12(5), 485–504.doi:10.1080/13549830701657059

Kollmuss, A., & Bowell, B. (2007). Voluntary offsets for air-travel carbon emissions: Evalu-ations and recommendations of voluntary offset companies (p. 53). Retrieved from http://sustainability.tufts.edu/wpcontent/uploads/TCI_Carbon_Offsets_Paper_April-2-07.pdf

Leggett, B.Y.K. (2012). Leaving light footprints. International Educator, XXI(3), 41–52.Lele, S.M. (1991). Sustainable development: A critical review. World Development, 19(6), 607–621.Lewin, R. (2009). Transforming the study abroad experience into a collective priority. AAC&U Peer

Review, 11(4), 8–12.Liu, Z. (2003). Sustainable tourism development: A critique. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(6),

459–475.Lu, J., & Nepal, S.K. (2009). Sustainable tourismresearch: An analysis of papers published

in the Journal of Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(1), 5–16.doi:10.1080/09669580802582480

Lutterman-Aguilar, A., & Gingrich, O. 2002. Experiential pedagogy for study abroad: Educating forglobal citizenship. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, VII, 41–82.

MacCannell, D. (1976). The tourist: A new theory of the leisure class. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.

Marion, J.L., & Reid, S.E. (2007). Minimising visitor impacts to protected areas: The effi-cacy of low impact education programmes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(1), 5–27.doi:10.2167/jost593.0

Martin, S., & Jucker, R. (2005). Educating earth-literate leaders. Journal of Geography in HigherEducation, 29(1), 19–29. doi:10.1080/03098260500030298

Mathieson, A., & Wall, G. (1982). Tourism: Economic, physical and social impacts. Harlow:Longman.

McIntosh, A.J., & Zhara A. (2007). A cultural encounter through volunteer tourism: Towards theideals of sustainable tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(5), 541–556.

McKeowan, Joshua. (2009). The first time effect: The impact of study abroad on college studentintellectual development. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

McKercher, B. (1993). Some fundamental truths about tourism: Understanding tourism’s social andenvironmental impacts. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(1), 7–16.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

438 J. Long et al.

McKercher, B., Prideaux, B., Cheung, C., & Law, R. (2010). Achieving voluntary reductions in thecarbon footprint of tourism and climate change. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), 297–317.doi:10.1080/09669580903395022

Miyoshi, C., & Mason, K.J. (2009). The carbon emissions of selected airlines and aircraft types inthree geographic markets. Journal of Air Transport Management, 15(3), 138–147. Retrieved fromhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.11.009

Molnar, C., Heller B., & Solecki W. (2011). Using higher education-community partnerships topromote urban sustainability. Environment Magazine, 53(1), 18–28.

Myers, D.N., Hill, M., & Harwood, S.A. (2005). Transforming pedagogical outcomes. LandscapeJournal, 24(2–5), 172–184.

Naffziger, D.W., Bott, J.P., & Mueller, C.B. (2008). Factors influencing study abroad decisions amongcollege of business students. International Business: Research Teaching and Practice, 2(1),39–52.

Nakagawa, Y., & Payne, P.G. (2011). Experiencing beach in Australia: Study abroad students’ per-spectives. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1), 94–109.

Open Doors Information Portal. (2011). Institute of International Education. Retrieved fromhttp://www.iie.org/. . ./Open-Doors/Fast-Facts/Fast%20Facts%202011.ashx

Paige, R.M., Fry, G.W., Stallman, E.M., Josic, J., & Jon, J. (2009). Study abroad for global engage-ment: The long-term impact of mobility experiences. Intercultural Education, 20(1), S29–S44.doi:10.1080/14675980903370847

Palacios, C.M. (2010). Volunteer tourism, development and education in a postcolonial world: Con-ceiving global connections beyond aid. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18, 861–878.

Parker, J., Wade, R., & Atkinson, H. (2004). Citizenship and community from local to global:Implications for higher education of a global citizenship approach. In J. Blewitt & C. Cullingford(Eds.), The sustainability curriculum (p. 257). London: Earthscan.

Paton, J. (2008). What’s left of sustainable development? Journal of Australian Political Economy,62, 94–119.

Patterson, T., Gulden, T., Cousins, K., & Kraev, E. (2004). Integrating environmental, social and eco-nomic systems: A dynamic model of tourism in Dominica. Ecological Modeling, 175, 121–136.

Pedersen, P.J. (2009). Teaching towards an ethnorelative worldview through psychology study abroad.Intercultural Education, 20(1), S73–S86. doi:10.1080/14675980903370896

Pedersen, P.J. (2010). Assessing intercultural effectiveness outcomes in a year-longstudy abroad program. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34(1), 70–80.doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2009.09.003

Pomering, A., & White, L. (2011). The portrayal of Indigenous identity in Australian tourism brandadvertising: Engendering an image of extraordinary reality or staged authenticity? Place Brandingand Public Diplomacy, 7(3), 165–174. doi:10.1057/pb.2011.19

Reilly, D., & Senders, S. (2009). Becoming the change we want to see: Critical study abroad for atumultuous world. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, XVIII, 241–267.

Rexeisen, R.J., & Al-Khatib, J. (2009). Assurance of learning and study abroad: A case study. Journalof Teaching in International Business, 20(3), 192–207. doi:10.1080/08975930903099077

Ritchie, B.W., Carr, N., & Cooper, C.P. (2003). Managing educational tourism. Bristol: ChannelView Publications.

Rowe, D. (2002). Environmental literacy and sustainability as core requirements: Success stories andmodels. In W.L. Fihlo (Ed.), Teaching sustainability at universities (pp. 79–103). New York: PeterLang.

Schroeder, K., Wood, C., Galiardi, S., & Koehn, J. (2009). First, do no harm: Ideas for mitigatingnegative community impacts of short-term study abroad. Journal of Geography, 108, 141–147.

Scott, D., & Becken, S. (2010). Adapting to climate change and climate policy: Progress, problems andpotentials. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), 283–295. doi:10.1080/09669581003668540

Scott, D., Peeters, Paul, & Gossling, S. (2010). Can tourism deliver its “aspirational” greenhouse gasemission reduction targets? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), 393–408.

Selby, D. (2006). The catalyst that is sustainability: Bringing permeability to disciplinary boundaries.Planet, (17), 57–59.

Shackelford, A.L. (2011). Address risks associated with study abroad. Dean and Provost. WileyPeriodicals.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 439

Shah, K., McHarry, J., & Gardiner, R. (2002). Sustainable tourism: Turning the tide. Towards earthsummit 2002, Economic briefing no. 4. United Nations Environmental Program InternationalAdvisory Board.

Silvia, A. (2008). Green campuses, green programs. Journal of New England Board of HigherEducation, 23(2), 30.

Sjoberg, S.D., & Shabalina, O.I. (2010). More than a sight-seeing trip: Enhancing the value inshort-term study abroad. Business Education Innovation, 2(2), 46–59.

Sneddon, C., Howarth, R.B., & Norgaard, R.B. (2006) Sustainable development in a post-Brundtlandworld. Ecological Economics, 57, 253–268.

Soneson, H.M., & Cordano, R.J. (2009). Universal design and study abroad: (Re)Designing programsfor effectiveness and access. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, XVIII,269–288.

Srinivasamohan, A., & Lee, H. (2010). Cross-border carbon footprints: University study abroad andcarbon offsetting programs. Conference Presentation: Association for Environmental Studies andSciences.

Stephens, J.C., & Graham, A.C. (2010). Toward an empirical research agenda for sustainability inhigher education: Exploring the transition management framework. Journal of Cleaner Produc-tion, 18(7), 611–618. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.07.009

Stronza, A. (2007). The economic promise of ecotourism for conservation. Journal of Ecotourism,6(3), 210–230.

Tarrant, M. (2009). A conceptual framework for exploring the role of studies abroad in nur-turing global citizenship. Journal of Studies in International Education, 14(5), 433–451.doi:10.1177/1028315309348737

Tarrant, M., & Lyons, K. (2012). The effect of short-term educational travel programs on environ-mental citizenship. Environmental Education Research, 18(3), 403–416.

Theobald, W.F. (Ed.). (2005). Global tourism. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.Tripoli, L. (2010). Sustainable travel: Policies, programs, and results. Sustainability, 3(5), 290–293.

doi:10.1089/sus.2010.9745Venetoulis, J. (2001). Assessing the ecological impact of a university. International Journal of

Sustainability in Higher Education, 2(2), 180–196.Vogel, H.L. 2001. Travel industry economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Wang, Q., Taplin, R., & Brown, A.M. (2011). Chinese students’ satisfaction of the study

abroad experience. International Journal of Educational Management, 25(3), 265–277.doi:10.1108/09513541111120105

Wearing, S. (2004) Examining best practice in volunteer tourism. In R. Stebbins & M. Graham (Eds.).Volunteering as leisure/ Leisure as volunteering (pp. 209–224). Cambridge: CABI.

Weaver, D. (2006). Sustainable tourism: Theory and practice (1st ed., p. 240). Burlington, MA:Butterworth Heinemann.

Williams, M. (2002). Tourism liberalization, gender and the GATS. IGTN Series: Eco-nomic Literacy Series: General Agreement on Trade in Services. Retrieved from:web.igtn.org/home/index.php?option=com docman. . .6.

Williams, A.M. (2013). Mobilities and sustainable tourism: Path-creating or path-dependent relation-ships. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(4), 511–531.

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future. NewYork: Oxford University Press.

World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). (2002). Sustainable tourism in protected areasguidelines for planning and management. In Best practice protected area guidelines series, No.8. Gland, Switzerland/Cambridge, UK: IUCN – The World Conservation Union.

Wynveen, C., Kyle, G., & Tarrant, M. (2012). Study abroad experiences and global citizenship:Fostering proenvironmental behavior. Journal of Studies in International Education, 16, 334–352.doi:10.1177/1028315311426782

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er L

ibra

ries

] at

08:

30 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014