Multi-Criteria, Cost-Benefit, and Life-Cycle Analyses for Decision-Making to Support Responsible, Sustainable, and Alternative Tourism

• Main Author: Fabio Zagonari
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 2019-02-01
• Series: Sustainability
• Subjects: responsible tourism; sustainable tourism; alternative tourism; indicators; decision-making methods; planning and management; assessment methods
• Online Access: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1038

This paper combines the most popular tourism typologies or goals (i.e., RT, responsible tourism, to represent impact minimisation; ST, sustainable tourism, to represent welfare maximisation; AT, alternative tourism, to represent continuity maximisation) and decision-making methodologies (i.e., MCA, multi-criteria analysis; CBA, cost-benefit analysis; WLCA, weighted life-cycle assessment; MLCA, monetary life-cycle assessment) in a single dynamic framework to operationally match the former with the latter. <i>Normative</i> insights show that MCA and WLCA are most suitable for RT and AT, respectively, whereas CBA and MLCA are most suitable for ST. Management <i>recommendations</i> (i.e., if a wrong static instead of a right dynamic approach must be adopted due to a lack of data, once chosen a tourism typology or goal, ST is the best in terms of level, correlation and likelihood of errors) are provided, and policy <i>recommendations</i> (i.e., if a right dynamic approach is adopted, in choosing among tourism typologies or goals, AT is the best in terms of precaution, ST is the best in terms of correlation, and RT is the best in terms of risk of investments) are suggested for a case study characterized by negative environmental and cultural dynamics. <i>Positive</i> insights show that two and many papers have applied WLCA and MLCA, respectively, to RT, but they did not account for cultural features; many papers have applied CBA to ST, but only one paper applied MLCA; few and no papers have applied MCA and WLCA, respectively, to AT.