Bicycle-Friendly Accommodation Certification: A Comparative Review of Turkiye and International Examples

Abstract

This study examines the Bicycle-Friendly Accommodation Facility Certificate implemented by Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Turkiye within the framework of sustainable tourism. By comparing this certification system with international examples, the research identifies similarities and differences in governance, criteria, and inspection processes. The findings reveal notable commonalities and distinctions among the certification systems. While all systems feature mandatory components such as secure parking, repair tools, and tailored nutritional services, the Turkish model stands out with its state-led, legally grounded framework and its points-based evaluation system, which is designed to encourage service enhancements. However, the study also identifies challenges in post-certification inspections and international visibility, which may limit the model's impact. The findings suggest that aligning Turkiye's certification system with best practices from international models could enhance its effectiveness and foster the growth of bicycle tourism. The insights derived from this research offer actionable guidance for policymakers and stakeholders seeking to promote sustainable tourism practices on a global scale. These insights include the identification of gaps in inspection processes, the enhancement of international cooperation, and the adoption of innovative solutions.

Keywords

• Bicycle tourism
• bicycle-friendly accomodation
• tourism certification
• sustainable accomodation
• Turkiye.

Bicycle-Friendly Accommodation Certification: A Comparative Review of Turkiye and International Examples

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı tarafından sürdürülebilir turizm çerçevesinde uygulanan Bisiklet Dostu Konaklama Tesisi Belgesi’ni incelemektedir. Araştırma, bu sertifikasyon sistemini uluslararası örneklerle karşılaştırarak yönetişim, kriterler ve denetim süreçlerindeki benzerlikleri ve farklılıkları ortaya koymaktadır. Bulgular, sertifikasyon sistemleri arasında dikkate değer ortak noktalar ve ayrışmalar bulunduğunu göstermektedir. Tüm sistemlerde güvenli park alanları, tamir ekipmanları ve bisikletçilere özel beslenme hizmetleri gibi zorunlu bileşenler bulunurken, Türkiye modeli devlet liderliğinde ve yasal temelli bir çerçeveye sahip olmasıyla ve hizmet iyileştirmelerini teşvik etmeye yönelik puan tabanlı değerlendirme sistemiyle öne çıkmaktadır. Bununla birlikte, çalışma, sertifikasyon sonrası denetim süreçlerinde karşılaşılan zorlukları ve uluslararası görünürlük eksikliğini de tespit etmektedir; bu unsurlar modelin etkisini sınırlayabilir. Bulgular, Türkiye’nin sertifikasyon sistemini uluslararası modellerdeki en iyi uygulamalarla uyumlu hale getirmenin, sistemin etkinliğini artırabileceğini ve bisiklet turizminin gelişimini destekleyebileceğini önermektedir. Araştırmadan elde edilen içgörüler, sürdürülebilir turizm uygulamalarını küresel ölçekte teşvik etmek isteyen politika yapıcılar ve paydaşlar için uygulanabilir rehberlik sunmaktadır. Bu içgörüler, denetim süreçlerindeki eksikliklerin belirlenmesi, uluslararası iş birliğinin güçlendirilmesi ve yenilikçi çözümlerin benimsenmesi gibi alanları kapsamaktadır.

Keywords

• Bisiklet turizmi
• bisiklet dostu konaklama
• turizm sertifikasyonu
• sürdürülebilir konaklama
• Türkiye

References

1. Bakogiannis, E., Vlastos, T., Athanasopoulos, K., Christodoulopoulou, G., Karolemeas, C., Kyriakidis, C., ... & Tzika, E. (2020). Development of a cycle-tourism strategy in Greece based on the preferences of potential cycle-tourists. Sustainability, 12(6), 2415.
2. Bett und Bike (2024). Accessed adress (23.12.2024): https://www.bettundbike.de/en/get-certified
3. Bike Hotels (2024) Accessed adress (23.12.2024): https://www.bikehotels.travel/en
4. Blackman, A., Naranjo, M. A., Robalino, J., Alpízar, F., & Rivera, J. (2014). Does tourism eco-certification pay? Costa Rica’s blue flag program. World Development, 58, 41-52.
5. Bramwell, B. (2015). Theoretical activity in sustainable tourism research. Annals of Tourism research, 54, 204-218.
6. Castillo-Manzano, J. I., Castro-Nuño, M., López-Valpuesta, L., & Zarzoso, Á. (2021). Measuring the role of Blue Flags in attracting sustainable ‘sun-and-sand’ tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 24(15), 2204–2222. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1844642
7. Cycling UK (2024). Accessed adress (23.12.2024): https://www.cyclinguk.org/cyclists-welcome/listing-accreditation
8. Esparon, M., Gyuris, E., & Stoeckl, N. (2014). Does ECO certification deliver benefits? An empirical investigation of visitors’ perceptions of the importance of ECO certification’s attributes and of operators’ performance. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(1), 148–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.802325

9. EuroVelo (2020). Accessed adress (23.12.2024): https://pro.eurovelo.com/news/2020-11-06_eco-cicle-good-practices-services-to-cyclists
10. Faulks, P., Ritchie, B. & Fluker, M. (2007). Cycle Tourism in Australia: An Investigation into its Size and Scope. Gold Coast. Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research.
11. Font, X. (2002). Environmental certification in tourism and hospitality: progress, process and prospects. Tourism Management, 23(3), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0261-5177(01)00084-x
12. France Velo Tourisme (2024). Accessed adress (23.12.2024): https://en.francevelotourisme.com/tips-and-advices/accueil-velo
13. Go Türkiye (2024). Accessed adress (23.12.2024): https://cycling.goturkiye.com/tr/bisiklet-dostu-konaklama-tesisleri
14. Graci, S., & Dodds, R. (2015). Certification and labelling. In Hall, C. M., Gössling, S., & Scott, D. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and Sustainability (pp. 200–208). Abingdon: Routledge.
15. Güvenç, A. (2022). Türkiye’de Bisiklet Turizminin Mevcut Durum ve Potansiyel Açısından Değerlendirilmesi. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Isparta Uygulamalı Bilimler Üniversitesi Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Isparta.
16. Kang, K. H., Stein, L., Heo, C. Y., & Lee, S. (2012). Consumers’ willingness to pay for green initiatives of the hotel industry. International journal of hospitality management, 31(2), 564-572.
17. Karlsson, L., & Dolnicar, S. (2016). Does eco certification sell tourism services? Evidence from a quasi-experimental observation study in Iceland. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(5), 694-714.
18. Mehmetoglu, M. (2007). Typologising nature-based tourists by activity—Theoretical and practical implications. Tourism management, 28(3), 651-660.
19. Nat Tour (2024). Accessed adress (23.12.2024): https://www.nattour.gr/en/en-about-nattour
20. Puhakka, R., & Siikamäki, P. (2012). Nature tourists’ response to ecolabels in Oulanka PAN Park, Finland. Journal of Ecotourism, 11(1), 56-73.
21. Ritchie, B. W. & Hall, C. M. (1999). Bicycle tourism and regional development: A New Zealand case study. Anatolia, 10(2), 89-112. doi.org/10.1080/13032917.1999.9686974
22. Simonsen, P. & Jorgenson, B. (1998). Cycle Tourism: An Economic and Environmental Sustainable Form of Tourism? Unit of Tourism Research, Research Centre of Bornholm.
23. T.C. Resmî Gazete [Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkiye]. (2020, August 25). Resmî Gazete (Issue No. 31224). Accessed adress (20.12.2024): https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2020/08/20200825-5.htm
24. Weston, R., Davies, N., Lumsdon, L., McGrath, P., Peeters, P., Eijgelaar, E. & Piket, P. (2012). The European Cycle Route Network EuroVelo. Brussels, Belgium.
25. Xue, N., Chan, E. K., & Wan, L. C. (2023). How eco-certificate/effort influences hotel preference. Annals of Tourism Research, 101, 103616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2023.103616