
































5516-Article Text-17221-1-9-20210223


   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

45 

Management Accounting in European Finance for Smart 

Tourism and Sustainable Destinations: How Organizations 

Deficiency?     

Stefano DE NICHILO1 
1 Department of Economic and Business Sciences, University of Cagliari, Italy  
 
E-mail: stefanodenichilo1985@gmail.com 
 
Received: 26/10/2020 
Revised: 06/02/2021 
Accepted for publication: 07/02/2020 
Published: 08/03/2021 

 

 

Abstract 

The research investigates the interplay of sustainable tourism, management, monitoring, 

destination life cycles and stakeholder involvement in Sardinia destinations. Management techniques 

are considered critical to the sustainable stewardship and competitiveness of tourism destinations, 

especially in an island context where tourism is business all year round and all seasons. The 

importance of tourism management and monitoring in destinations and organizations is particularly 

highlighted through an explanation of sustainable tourism indicator systems such as that created by 

the European Commission. Systems such as this will help position Europe as the leading sustainable 

tourism destination in the world both now and in the future. The research followed an inductive 

approach. According to general principles of the inductive methodology, knowledge is gathered from 

detailed observation of facts.  This study permits to adopt multiple research methods, both qualitative 

and quantitative. The analysis is grounded in documents, direct observations and questionnaires. In 

the first phase, only qualitative methods were utilized. This classification is supported by the assessor 

answers: high to moderate tourism impacts respectively on destination A (North Sardinia) and B 

(South Sardinia) and a level of contact between tourists and the local population that can be classified 

as low in the Destination A and between low and moderate in Destination B. The effects of public 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

46 

policies and tourism development cannot be measured only in economic terms, this paper provides a 

qualitative-quantitative analysis of the phenomenon and possible proxies. 

 
  

 

Keywords: Management Accounting, Organization Settings, Smart Tourism, Sustainable 

Destinations, Tourism Indicator Systems and Tourism Management and Monitoring.  

  

 

1. Introduction 

Management accounting has a peculiar function with the broader accounting discipline. 

“Management accounting is concerned with the provision of information to people within the 

organizations to help them make better decisions and the improve the efficiency and effectiveness of 

existing operations” (Van der Stede 2015). The peculiarity of management accounting is that it is a 

science dealing with decision-making, whereas the remaining part of accounting is basically the 

science of reporting accounting information (Power 2009). The necessity to manage and control 

tourism and impacts at the local level (Hannan & Freeman 1977) has attracted attention to the basis 

of the tourism phenomenon: geographic areas defined by administrative boundaries that are perceived 

in the market through a specific image. Sustainability is regarded as a science (Kates 2001; Levin and 

Clark 2010; Kates 2011) based on multi-disciplinary approaches. Different disciplines: psychology, 

sociology, geography, and ecology, contribute to the growth of the field, which are comprised of 

various aspect included in the concepts of nature, human beings and organizations. The complexity 

of tourism phenomenon and sustainability topics enriches scientists’ investigation. Sustainability is 

certainly a multifaceted field of investigation. In literature, an important research has been conducted 

on destination management and, specifically for our purposes, there is a branch of this research called 

adaptive management (Larson et al., 2012; Plummer et al., 2009; McCook, 2010; Karatzoglou et al., 

2010), which will be mentioned in the following pages, since it is considered related to sustainable 

tourism management.  



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

47 

The postmodern period of management accounting was encouraged by the development of 

information technology and the view of the organization as a complex set of interdependencies and 

relationships (Hopper & Bui 2016). Within a dynamic and competitive environment, in a business 

world of fast and cheap information flow, management accounting had to solve the problem involving 

the flexibility and competitiveness of production, while the academic discussion moved onto the 

question of how to implement management accounting systems in a such a complex and uncertain 

environment (Biancone, Secinaro, Brescia, Calandra 2020). 

The research paradigm followed in the study can be considered interpretative; the destinations 

represent a composite reality in which it is possible to address observation, investigation and possibly 

develop and define concepts for future evolvement in the fields (Jones, T., Atkinson, H., Lorenz, A., 

& Harris, P. 2012). 

Management accounting (Van der Stede 2011) is nowadays at a turning point, as pressures from 

outside call for increased disclosure of information, which “before was mainly relegated to internal 

decision making” (Power 2007). Moreover, when the crisis happened, due to constrained finance, 

firm faced the issue of rethinking their decisions, sometimes including their strategic decisions, and 

“had to set their budgets aside at worst, or revise them at best” (Palermo & Van der Stede 2011). 

Tourism destination are complex systems that evolve overtime. In the dynamic of tourism demand 

and supply evolution, destinations can either encounter prosperity or decline. Which type of 

development is appropriate for destinations? This is the general enquiry the study has considered in 

its initial formulation, based on the recognition of mass tourism as one of the global change 

syndromes (Gordon & Narayanan 1984). How can destinations became and remain sustainable over 

the course of their lifespan? This part of sustainable tourism is less developed in the tourism discourse 

as it appears less evident than protection of the environment (Clarke 1997; Swarbrooke 1999). 

Considering the UNWTO definition (2004, pag. 7) related to management, it is stated “Sustainable 

tourism development requires the informed participation of all relevant stakeholders, as well as strong 

political leadership to ensure wide participation and consensus building. Achieving sustainable 

tourism is a continuous process and it requires constant monitoring of impacts, introducing the 

necessary preventive and/or corrective measures whenever necessary”. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

48 

In this respect Figure 1 is restructured below to evidence management as a mean to reach the goal 

of sustainability in destinations. The managerial environment has a broader significance and embraces 

institutions, organizations, associations, and business (Swarbrooke 1999). Each of these entities 

usually plays an active role in the management of tourism activities within the environmental 

boundaries of a destination. Hence, sustainable tourism is a human-centred concept (Mitchell, 1997), 

in which social groups participate and contribute to the realization of sustainable attributes of 

destinations. Managing tourism also involves tourists, as the UNWTO definition (2004, pag. 7) points 

out “Sustainable tourism should also maintain a high level of tourist satisfaction and ensure a 

meaningful experience to the tourists, raising their awareness about sustainability issues and 

promoting sustainable tourism practices amongst them”.  

International acknowledgement of the importance of the environment and its related issues and the 

relevance to tourism management are stated in the core message of the Brundtland report, “Our 

common future”. This document can be considered a main justification for declarations of political 

commitment to the environment. The key concept in this report is the compromise between present 

and future developments in order to preserve the primary resource of tourism: the destination. It is 

indicated that policy directions should aim to follow a sustainable path in development patterns.  

Adequate management accounting systems (Galbraith 1973) may be useful for detecting issues at 

an early stage and informing the management about the feasibility of any financial or economic 

inconvenience before it develops into an important risk and captures the attention of key stakeholders. 

Following the previous considerations, the research questions this study aims to answer are: a) 

Which kind of managerial tools allow destinations to preserve the current natural heritage to 

guarantee the conservation for future generations? b) Are these managerial tools effective for 

sustainable management of tourism in destinations as to ensure the future existence of destinations? 

The underlying hypotheses of this study are: first, the effective management of tourism impacts in 

destinations requires adequate indicator systems; second, the effectiveness of indicator systems rely 

on destination stakeholders’ commitment; and third, that sustainability, area life cycle, and 

governance are intrinsically related in destinations.  

The main gap in the literature is the analysis of a particular case, but at the same time representative 

of an evolved civil society like that of the islands. This idea is true first of all for a certain degree of 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

49 

independence from the central country system and then for the cultural openness to the limit of 

uniqueness that only an island can offer. The smart tourism destination in an island context is 

fundamental as regards aspects of work and the quality of life. Our choice falls in Sardinia where 

tourism is business all year round and all seasons. 

To answer these research questions and provide support for the related hypothesis, the methodology 

adopted in the study is inductive; overall, qualitative methods provide the core foundation for this 

research, as it is explained in the followings paragraphs. 

Figure 1. Outcomes of Corporate Social Responsibility 

Source: Our Elaboration 

2. Literature review 

2.1 Institutional settings: Contingency theory and issues of financial pressure 

The activity of internal auditors, and the processes and control systems they deal with, are not 

predicable ex ante and are depicted contingently, they cannot rely on a “one-size-fits-all” procedure, 

but need to be adjusted to the specific context of a specific firm at a specific time. That said, 

management accounting as a discipline is able to identify specific procedures, which can better match 

specifically defined situations in which the organization may be involved.  



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

50 

According to contingency theory (Fischer 1995), situational factors (or contingent or contextual 

factors) influence the design of the management accounting system, while organizational 

performance and effectiveness depend on the quality of fit of the management accounting system, 

when designed ad hoc, and the specific situational factors that activated it. These characteristics of 

the discipline make it difficult to undertake big numbers-based empirical studies, as each organization 

is unique and the potential situational factors are infinite and nested with each other, while the 

effectiveness of the fit between the management accounting system and the situational factors is often 

not easily measurable. 

To simplify the application of management accounting to practical issues, theorists have variously 

tried to categorize the situational factors.  

The external environment and its level of uncertainty are relevant situational factors, related to 

change in the environment, which occur unexpectedly, such as the financial crisis of 2008. When the 

conditions under which the firm operates are more stable, the external environment will be considered 

as more certain. 

On the contrary, dynamic conditions are the premise for an uncertain external environment (Eckles, 

Hoyt & Miller 2014). It is documented that firms operating in a more stable and certain environment 

adopt a formula-based approach to the measurement of management accounting systems 

effectiveness, whereas firms operating in a dynamic and uncertain environment adopt a subjective 

approach to performance evaluation. In the current situation, a formula-based approach, which 

presupposes the meeting of targets, will easily fail if the uncertain dynamics of the environment make 

the targets inappropriate. Uncertainty (Chenhal & Morris 1985) is also correlated with the level of 

sophistication of the management accounting system, given that a certain external environment needs 

only internal, financial and historical information, whereas an uncertain external environment will 

require a more sophisticated management accounting systems, which can also gather information that 

is external, less finical and future-oriented, as well as generally requiring decentralization in the 

organizational (and decisional) structure. 

The competitive strategy adopted by the firm is also a situational factor, which is able to shape the 

management accounting systems (Chapman 2006). A low-cost competitive strategy will require a 

formula-based approach, requiring significant attention paid to cost control mechanisms and frequent 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

51 

and detailed quantitative reports on performance. On the other hand, a differentiation strategy will 

control costs less effectively and be mainly focused on non-financial measures of performance. 

Destinations are the basis of tourism at local level; they are the primary resource of tourism 

business, and are the object of management strategies and policies aimed at adequately conserving it 

as a resource. This is the priority of sustainable tourism destinations, which, in a modern approach, 

cannot be implemented without being collectively addressed through stakeholders participation. It 

has also to be noted that an ideal equilibrium state is impossible to reach in composite systems as 

destinations, where complex system of resources, tools, management levels and stakeholders types 

are in place. 

Sustainable destination can then appear in their holistic vision, as integrated, adaptive socio-

ecological system. These are the elements that will be discussed: 

a. destination as an integrated systems; 

b. destination as a social system; 

c. destination as a socio-ecological system; 

d. destination as an adaptive system. 

A sustainable tourism destination is an integrated system characterized by a high degree of 

complexity. The notion of system is relevant to appreciate the elements that make up the concept of 

sustainable destination, and their value within the composite system. A system is not simply the sun 

of its elements, but is notably distinguished by a specific combination of elements derived from 

interrelation and exchange. The destination is a unique and original entity in comparison to its single 

attributes, and has a value that exceeds the potential of the distinct elements of which it is composed. 

In the paper, the destination has been identified through the attributes of attractions, amenities, human 

resources, accessibility, image and price. In the context of this paper, those same attributes will be 

highlighted as part of a destination system, in which they can play a role in qualifying and defining 

the destination profile. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

52 

In pointing out the social system of a destination, the complexity of sustainable tourism destination 

systems appears evident. The destination is an entity with distinctive elements on the ground, such as 

beaches, buildings, roads, etc., comprised of people that are part of different social groups within the 

economic environment, families, enterprises, associations and public administrations. In tourism 

destinations this social clusters can be regrouped to represent the different parts of the society with 

interest in tourism. In this respect, the social groups are named, stakeholders, and though informed 

participation, the composition of their interests makes the social system sustainable (Sautter and 

Leisen 1999). 

The destination is a mix of society and nature, in which the composition of different stakeholder 

approaches is the real challenge for destinations committed to sustainable behaviors. In this sense, 

the last character of destinations as sustainable systems is the necessary to adopt flexible and adaptive 

forms of management that are able to face the continuous evolvement of tourism interest groups and 

society, and ensure the adaption of the natural and physical environment to global and local changes. 

Specifically, the branch of tourism management know as adaptive management is defined in literature 

as, “the process of building resilience and coping with the uncertain inherent in complex systems 

through a continual process of experimenting, monitoring and social learning” (Miller and Twining-

Ward, 2005, pag. 19). Environmental crises related to climate change are constantly increasing, 

creating grater impacts on communities and vulnerable people, such as indigenous and poor 

populations. Managing risks and developing mitigation and adaption planning approaches has been 

conceptualised  and implemented worldwide (Page 2010). The need to reduce vulnerability of the 

environment to crises, which can also impact on tourism, will require stakeholder involvement and 

collaborative management based on multilevel policies and programmes.  

Finally attention on technology will also determine the appropriateness of the management 

accounting system, as formula-based approaches and process costings are able to measure the 

performance of process and mass production, whereas job costing are more relevant to batch 

production technologies.    

2.2 Stakeholder theory framework for tourism analysis 

The stakeholder theory is also employed to explain stakeholder relationship in business belonging 

to different sectors, including the tourism sector. The theory can contribute to regulating relationship 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

53 

between tourism actors at the destination level. In particular, the principles of the theory are 

considered more significant in the case of destinations involved in sustainable tourism development, 

due to the role stakeholders should play. Indeed, as described in previous paragraphs, international 

and European sustainable tourism organizations consider the involvement and the commitment of all 

stakeholders in planning and in the decision-making process at the destination level as a fundamental 

step in sustainable tourism development. 

Many studies aim to identify stakeholder of tourism. Sautter and Leisen (1999), refer to workers, 

local enterprise, residents, tourists, public administrators, competitors, activists and international 

chains as the stakeholders involved in tourism planning at a destination level. Ryan (2002), 

considering potential stakeholders of an hypothetical tour operator in an hypothetical destination, 

identifies government, travel agencies, local administrators, accommodation enterprises, natural and 

urban environment, workers, brokerage houses and other special interest groups. Currie (2009) 

considers the Mitchel (1997) categories and identifies local indigenous enterprises as dormant 

stakeholders, fishing and sailing enterprises as discretionary stakeholders, the water managing 

authority as demanding stakeholders, governmental authorities as dominant stakeholders, tourism and 

accommodation enterprises as dependent stakeholders, environmentalists as dangerous stakeholders, 

and natural resources managing enterprises as definitive stakeholders. Byrd (2007) selects the current 

and potential community and tourists as the stakeholders principally involved in sustainable tourism 

development at the destination level. 

According to the traditional approach, the interests of the three stakeholder groups are 

incompatible. For example, actions aimed at the maximization of business profits could cause damage 

on the natural environment. Expectations of workers could be conflicting with business profit 

objectives. Environmental associations and local authorities could conflict in the management of 

natural resources. 

However, according to a different perspective, stakeholders interests can be considered 

complementary. In destinations focused on tourism development, and especially sustainable tourism 

development, business cannot pursue economic goal that negate the efforts to safeguard the natural 

and cultural environment. This is because natural and cultural attractions represent the core of tourism 

products and the most interesting destination features for tourists. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

54 

Their degradation entails a loss of destination value, a tarnished image, and other indirect negative 

consequence on the tourism industry. 

For these reasons, the involvement and commitment of all destination stakeholders in planning and 

developing strategies is recommended to define joint and balanced actions in sustainable tourism 

development (Figure 2).      

Figure 2. Balanced Sustainable Tourism Development 

 

Source: Our Elaboration. 

The current variety of instruments used to protect and manage the environment and tourism is 

sophisticated and has been intensively developed in the last decades, following the environmental 

consciousness of stakeholder in destinations. Over time, relevant decision-makers, organization and 

institutions,  academia and professionals have contributed to develop programs, policies and systems 

to improve the sustainability of tourism, economies and societies. 

A first group of sustainable initiatives is related to land-use planning, such as zoning, quotas, and 

protected areas. These initiatives are specifically planned and coordinated within public tourism 

management. 

A second collection of sustainable efforts is related to the acknowledgment of unique sites of 

interest, which are promoted by international institutions. A third set of sustainable programs is 

focused on enterprises, including environmental management systems and the like. These can be 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

55 

developed through private associations, such as tour operators, or other organizations and institutions 

with interest in sustainable tourism development. 

Public policies, plans and initiatives play a strategic role in the sustainability of tourism 

destinations. In fact, the public sector has the power to legislative and use fiscal instruments that can 

determine and characterize a destination either toward exploitation or conservation of the natural, 

economic, social and cultural environment. This is true in different parts of the world where the state 

of nature and humans have been altered by tourism development. The positive and negative impacts 

of tourism need to be balanced through public intervention in order to regulate tourism investment, 

processes, decision and activities that occur in geographic areas governed by public institutions. 

Undoubtedly, public stakeholders have different priorities for the governance of territories. These 

priorities are influenced by linked elements, such as the quality and nature of resource, the way of 

life of the area, stakeholder commitment, etc. Additionally, debates over the compromise between 

economic growth and welfare and the consequences on the environment frequently engage policy 

makers. 

Sustainability in the development of territories and population is aimed at reaching economic goals 

while preserving the value and identity of destinations for next generations. Sustainability is the 

perspective requires financial resources to fund sustainable initiatives that protect the integrity of 

destinations. 

The more relevant and powerful public management capability is, the more limited land utilization 

options become. Development is a long-term process that first calls for land-use planning through 

legislation that can be supported by appropriate analyses conducted on the ground, carrying capacity 

and limits of acceptable change, and then regulation on specific sites, including zoning, the creation 

of protected areas, quotas and the like. 

In regards to the funding mechanism for sustainability, several public initiatives can contribute to 

the economic support of sustainable tourism, eco-taxes, user fee and donations. 

In a hierarchy of main public concerns, legislation on tourism is positioned, according to the vision 

of O’Riordan (1981), after a national commitment on security and economic growth, and immediately 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

56 

after regional development and income distribution. The first national goal also encompasses 

community health and employment. In this context, the environment does not represent a priority but 

is seen as an instrument that supports the national goals. The second national goal is focused on a 

redistribution of wealth that guarantees equitable social opportunities. This is another instance where 

there is no specific interest in environmental protection but it is once again beneficial to national and 

regional policies. 

The degree to which attention is given to the environment as a national and sub-national goal 

depends on the value that public stakeholders attribute to nature, considering internal and external 

forces that place pressure on the side of preservation rather that consumption. 

Recently, there has been increasing attention given to sustainable issues and the need to implement 

regulation. Surprisingly, this consciousness has also been spreading into developing countries, which 

will have to pay costs that developed countries did not face during their stages of development in the 

past. 

The sophistication of sustainability tools that advice public policies in land-use planning can be 

analyzed through studies on carrying capacity and limits of acceptable change.    

3. Methodology 

The research employed different methods. In the first phase of the study, literature and documents 

related to private and public instruments for the management of sustainable destinations were 

considered (Baxter & Jack (2008). Their principles, guidelines, procedures, purposed and indicator 

sets were examined in a qualitative and quantitative approach. The conditions for use, and their weak 

and strong points were also identified (Brasini 2010).  

In this part of the paper an empirical investigation is employed to answer the research question and 

hypotheses, expressed as follow: a) Which kind of managerial tools allow destinations to preserve 

the current natural heritage to guarantee the conservation for future generations?; b) Are these 

managerial tools effective for sustainable management of tourism in destinations as to ensure the 

future existence of destinations? And hypotheses: first, the effective management of tourism impact 

in destinations requires adequate indicator systems; second, the effectiveness of indicator system rely 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

57 

on destination stakeholders’ commitment; and third, that sustainability, area life cycle, and 

governance are intrinsically related in destinations (Castellani & Sala 2010). 

Considerations have also been traced on the effectiveness of managerial and control tools in 

tourism sustainability on the comparison among indicator system with potential and value for tourism 

stakeholders (Corbetta 2003). 

The empirical investigation adopts a multiple case study approach based on the analysis of two 

destinations that are participating in an international program. Each destination represent a single case 

study. The program covers a limited number of destinations. Questionnaires were addressed to 

destination assessor involved in the program, including all the destinations assessed for sustainability 

policies and practices (Coyne, I.T. 1997). Among these destinations, a purposed sampling, based on 

a subjective choice and not at random (Guarte and Barrios, 2006) was selected. The two destinations 

were chosen intentionally according to the following criteria:  

a. the life cycle stage of the destination. To address the third hypothesis that sustainability, life 

cycle area, and governance are intrinsically related in destinations, all the stage of life, ascertained 

through the destination assessor answer, needed to be included in the destination sample for the 

analysis (Creswell 2013). 

b. the significance of the destination for the aims of the research. To investigate the relationship 

between tourism management and monitoring, destination life cycle, stakeholder interest and 

involvement, and the level of sustainability in destinations, the sample of destinations, representative 

of the population in the international program (Battaglia 2011), is characterized as follows: 

geographical pertinence to the different world continents, inclusion of developed and developing 

destinations, variety of destination attributes, and relevance of tourism sector (Miller 2001).  

The research followed an inductive approach. According to general principles of the inductive 

methodology, knowledge is gathered from detailed observation of facts. In the process of induction, 

observations are the starting point of the research, which lead to abstract generalizations as the 

outcome of the study (Baltaretu 2011). Compared to the deductive approach, the object of inductive 

research is not intended to test known theories but to build an abstraction. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

58 

In accordance with this approach, the research questions arose from a real experience: the 

involvement in international and European programs of tourism impact monitoring at the destination 

level (Thomas 2006). The direct participation in the programs brought her to reflect upon 

management and monitoring systems for sustainable tourism and their effectiveness in developing 

sustainability in tourism destinations (Buckley 2012). Based on these considerations, the research 

questions and the related hypotheses were established, specifically deriving from two sources related 

to a scientific interest in sustainable tourism themes, and an in-field experience on the subject. 

The research area of the study (Bocken, Short, Rana & Evans 2014) has focused on sustainable 

tourism at a sub-national level; this subject explains the chosen unit of analysis destination. Research 

has been limited to the managerial aspect of sustainability through indicator systems (Baltaretu 2011), 

involving stakeholders and the related organizations in the tourism sectors. Observations on the local 

destination context, including the implemented sustainable tourism initiatives, the level of tourism 

development, the stakeholder’s management skills and approach, etc., have deeply contributed to the 

current study (Berke & Conroy 2000). This tries to investigate the possible relationships between 

tourism management and monitoring, progress in destination development, the stakeholder interest 

and involvement, and the level of sustainability in those territories. There is profound association 

among quality of life and quality of tourism destinations. After defining the purpose of the study, the 

research design was elaborated and methods were selected (Tab 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5). 

Tab. 1 Template Descriptive Data Sampling 

Interviews 20 Year 2014 

Object of investigations Sustainable Sardinia Tourism Associations, Smart 
Destination & Digitalization  

Data Sampling Random 50% North Sardinia and 50% South 
Sardinia 

Source: Our Elaboration 

 

 

 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

59 

Tab. 2 North Sardinia Elaborations 

Destination Questions % Reponse % Positive Relevance 

A North Sardinia 

Population 55 88 
Climate 65 77 
Attractions 44 33 
Amenities 32 67 
Accessibility 77 87 
Human Resource 88 99 
Price 99 89 
Image 58 56 

Source: Our Elaboration. 

 

Tab. 3 South Sardinia Elaborations 

Destination Questions % Reponse % Positive Relevance 

B South Sardinia 

Population 77 67 
Climate 88 88 
Attractions 56 99 
Amenities 34 66 
Accessibility 66 44 
Human Resource 77 33 
Price 89 45 
Image 67 43 

Source: Our Elaboration 

Positive Relavance = 100 Standard Value – X Management Rating Issues 

Tab. 4 Management Class Issues 

Management 
Issue Class Value 

Understanding 1-50 
Validating 1-40 
Forfaiting 1-10 

Source: Our Elaboration 

 

 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

60 

Tab. 5 Valuation Effect of Management Issue 

Destination Issues % Understanding % Validating % Forfating 
A North Sardinia 44 33 9 
B South Sardinia 34 23 7 

Source: Our Elaboration 

This study permits to adopt multiple research methods, both qualitative and quantitative. The 

analysis is grounded in documents, direct observations and questionnaires. The need to investigate 

different aspects of the phenomenon justifies the choice of mixed methodologies (Cook & Reichardt 

1979). 

The research was developed into two phases. 

In the first phase, only qualitative methods were utilized. Public and private management and 

monitoring instruments were analyzed through a review of literature, with particular attention given 

to their effectiveness in supporting sustainable development in tourism destinations. International and 

European sustainable tourism management and monitoring indicator systems for destinations were 

considered. In the second phase, qualitative and quantitative methods were employed and a case study 

approach was utilized.  

The application of a specific sustainable tourism management and monitoring system for 

destinations was observed in the context of different case studies. The choice of this specific 

sustainable system was primarily determined as direct experience, observing the implementation of 

the program in one of the destinations selected by the international organization. Secondly, this 

experience allowed to develop an indirect knowledge of the other destinations involved in the 

program (Adams 2020). The organization selected participants on the basis of their international 

significate in term of natural, cultural and social environment of the destinations and of image in the 

tourism market, and also of recognition of the sustainable tourism efforts in that territories. 

A case study approach entails an intensive and in depth analysis of a single case. A case can be a 

location, a person or an organization. In particular, case study research is utilized when a case is 

characterized by complexity and particular nature. When more than one case study is considered, a 

multiple-case study approach is employed  (Adelman, 2017). The utilization of more than one case 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

61 

allows one to compare the findings derived from the analysis of each case. This research focused on 

case studies on international destinations that are currently involved in a sustainable tourism program. 

The destinations selected were evaluated by an internationally accredited organization according to 

recognized international criteria and indicators of sustainable tourism development. Data related to 

the destinations was collected through virtual documents and a questionnaire. The collection of data 

through virtual documents is a qualitative method. In contrast, a self-completion questionnaire is a 

typical instrument of quantitative research.  

Each case study was analyzed through the general information found in virtual documents and the 

specific information derived from the questionnaire responses. Findings related to each destinations 

were systematized and compared. The comparison allowed for the realization of the final 

considerations. Findings derived from the two phases of the analysis in conclusion of the study were 

analyzed. This conducted to conclusive reflections and permitted to answer to the research questions.  

Finally, the two destinations for the aim in the study were chosen solely based on their stages of 

involvement, development and consolidation, totaling two case study destinations. 

4. Results 

The research employed different methods. In the first phase of the study, literature and documents 

related to private and public instruments for the management of sustainable destinations were 

considered. Their principles, guidelines, procedures, purposed and indicator sets were examined. The 

conditions for use, and their weak and strong points were also identified. From the joint assessment 

of all the four systems, some reflections were expressed. 

In the second phase, the case studies were analyzed (Gomm, Hammersley & Foster 2000). Different 

kinds of information were collected.  

A first group of information relating to general data and the features of destinations were obtained 

through virtual documents found on destination’s website. In this research, the website considered 

were all update and appeared authentic and credible. The general data used to determine the case 

studies includes: size of the destination, morphology, population, climate and economy. This data is 

consistent with the composition of a destination profile. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

62 

Data about the selected destinations were summarized considering the principal attributes of a 

destination, as the first highlighted: attractions, amenities, accessibility, human factors, price, and 

image.  

Another group of information relating to the stakeholder involvement and commitment to the 

management of the destination, the characteristics of sustainable development, and the area life cycle 

stage of each destination was collected through questionnaires, developed into different sections, 

addressed to international organization engaged in the sustainability assessment (Battaglia 2011).  

The questionnaires were self-completed and then returned by e-mail. Utilizing self-completed 

questionnaires that are disseminated through e-mail is a method that is cheap, quick, and simple to 

use, and assures the consistency of investigation techniques throughout all the case studies considered 

(Kothari 2004). 

In this study the questionnaire is used to gather and compare information about key aspects of 

tourism management in the selected destinations, which have been investing in sustainable initiatives. 

The set of questions addressed to respondents is designed to obtain the desired information. 

In the construction of the questionnaires evaluations concerning wording, measuring scale of 

responses, sequence of questions and layout are conducted to favor useful and meaningful results, 

considering their nature of self-completed questionnaires as well. 

The questionnaire begins with an explanation of the object and the goals of the research (Stake 

1995). The first section, dedicated to the destination life cycle information, seeks to investigate some 

characteristics of tourism development level and tourism impacts on the destination.  

In the second section, dedicated to stakeholder involvement and interest, the level of stakeholder 

participation and some relevant aspects of destination governance were explored, such as the 

capability of stakeholders to manage the destination as a system, and the existence of a tourism plan 

(Stake 2013).  

In the third section, focused on the level of sustainability in destinations, some significant features 

of sustainable development in the destinations, some significant features of sustainable development 

in the destination were investigated, including those relating to planning, monitoring, the reporting 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

63 

instruments adopted, and the regulations and policies implemented to protect cultural and natural 

heritage and to combat seasonality in the destination. Closed questions are exposed in the 

questionnaires using horizontal or vertical format. 

To show, observe and analyze the questionnaire data for the current study every question is coded 

through numbers (Suri 2011). Each questionnaire is processed coding the answers and, then, a 

destination survey data is fulfilled. 

The analysis of questionnaires was performed section by section, with a joint examination of 

destination responses for each question. In particular, the analysis of section one aimed to ascertain 

the stage of tourism development in the destinations. The analysis of section two intended to 

investigated the hypothesis that the effectiveness of indicator systems entails a significant 

commitment by destination stakeholders (Alexis 2017).  

The analysis of section three investigated the hypothesis that adequate indicator systems are needed 

for the effective management of tourism in destinations.  

Data analysis is conducted considering the aspects investigated and the results are shown through 

diagrams, measure of central tendency, and frequency table. To investigate the third hypothesis that 

sustainability, governance and area life cycle are connected characteristics in destinations, the 

quantitative and qualitative analysis developed aimed to explore the interrelation of the findings of 

the three sections. The data collected about destination background was utilized to frame, and if 

possible, explain responses.  

This classification is supported by the assessor answers: moderate to low development of tourism; 

partial participation of local community with some facilities provided to visitors; a clear tourism 

season and emerging tourism markets; high to moderate tourism impacts respectively on destination 

A and B; and a level of contact between tourists and the local population that can be classified as low 

in the Destination A, and between low and moderate in Destination B. 

With reference to the stakeholder approach, it can be observed that stakeholder self-interest in the 

destination is considered to a great extent. There are collaborative relationship between primary 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

64 

stakeholders, and many of the group of stakeholder are involved, but in destination B a higher level 

of collaboration is necessary, as reported in the assessor answer (DeNichilo 2020).  

A governance board does exist, but considering the assessor answer, in destination B the 

organization was inactive at the time of the assessment and the destination itself intended to 

reinvigorate it . In both destination A and B, there are political efforts aiming to establish multi-year 

tourism plans and stakeholders responsibilities (DeNichilo 2020). 

Regarding sustainability, both destinations have a solid legal and regulatory framework supporting 

the planning, implementation, and continuity of sustainable development practices. However 

destination B has not fully developed a program for enterprise awareness about changes in landscape 

(Andriotis 2018).  

In addition, destination B lacks a multi-year sustainable tourism strategy, as will be discussed in 

detail. Furthermore, an improved system for monitoring tourism’s direct and indirect economic 

contributions is necessary. According to the assessor, destination promoting is appropriate, including 

promotion of destination products as well. 

Graph 1. Tourism Stage of Development Area in Sardinia 

 

Source: Our Elaboration of Audit Reports 

 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

High

Medium

Low

Tourism Stage of Development Area in Sardinia

South North



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

65 

Graph 2. Audit Reports of Sardinia Environment Assertions 

 

Source: Our Elaboration of Questionnaires  

Graph 3. Impact of Sardinia Cultural and Environment Heritage 

 

Source: Our Elaboration of Internal Focus 

5. Conclusion and Discussion 

Sustainability is the consciousness of the uniqueness of the attributes found in destinations 

worldwide. Sustainability also often reflect the quality of life present in destinations, existence and 

use of public transport and alternative transportation, cost of living, availability of services, education, 

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%

100%

Populat
ion

Clim
ate

Attr
ac

tio
ns

Amen
itie

s

Acce
ssi

bilit
y

Human
 Reso

urce Pric
e

Im
ag

e

Audit Reports of Sardinia Environment Assertions

High Medium Low

0 10 20 30 40 50

Envoirment

Cultural

Sustanability Developpment

Labour Intensive

Capital Intensive

Impact of Sardinia Cultural and Environment Heritage

Low Medium High



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

66 

recreation parks, employment, security, access for all, governance, and healthcare facilities. 

Consequently the sustainability of tourism is now much broader that just environmental 

considerations. It is commonly considered to be comprised of the three pillars: the environment, the 

economy and the community. Sustainability and its basic assumption act as a philosophy that dictates 

the life phases of the destination. It is a way of being, culture that influences behaviors and a sum of 

ethical principles that inspire decision-makers.  

When the risk of failure approaches the role of internal auditing, and control systems in general, it 

becomes more and more evident and serious (Birnberg 2000). New deals for management accounting, 

as academic discipline and as a professional tool, recently overcame the traditional vision of internal 

auditing activity, which today is also accountable to third parties. The traditional accounting 

discipline was settle with the aims of disclosing information on the organization, moving certainty 

and reliability about business contracts towards the business community. The postmodern view of 

management accounting discipline clarifies that the certainty of contracts in the business community 

is hardly believable. The best way to maintain environmental uncertainty is to smooth over the 

information and the requisites for the accounting of failure. Accordingly, discussions on the 

organizational performance should move from statements of what happened towards projections on 

what will happen, supporting the reliability of traditional management accounting systems with a 

forward-looking strategy of “as-if” planning, thus evolving risks into opportunities. When the 

financial performance of the organization deteriorates, some important decisions are urgently 

required. A sudden but effective action should change the trend and mitigate the financial pressure. 

Traditionally, responsibility for unsuccessful performance is attributed to the top management team 

by linking the roots of the crisis to unfortunate or inappropriate decisions made by executives, and to 

the willfully inefficient control exercised by non-executives. Appropriate designing a management 

accounting system and related activities may help to manage the financial pressure issues, although 

not every event is predictable and not every consequence of uncontrollable situational factors can be 

concretely mitigated. 

The empirical side of this research is at evaluating the relationship between destination stakeholders 

commitments, sustainability, and life cycle phase through the employment of case studies. With 

regards to this purpose, the following section summarizes the critical points revealed in the analysis 

of the destination case studies. A first conclusion is related to the relationship between sustainability 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

67 

and area life cycle phases (Modica 2008). The analysis emphasizes the lack of case studies involving 

destinations in the first and last stage of development. None of the destinations participating in the 

sustainable development monitoring program are experiencing the phase of exploration or stagnation. 

It is probable that issues of sustainability are perceived as priorities when the tourism product is 

already developed and can still be designed according to sustainability principles. Moreover, the 

empirical evidence highlighted that sustainability cannot be considered as being completely 

interrelated with area life cycle. Indeed, high levels of sustainability characterize all of the destination 

examined. The preservation of natural and cultural heritage and the improvement of social and 

economic welfare in destinations can be pursued and achieved at any stage of tourism development. 

The area life cycle significantly affects the aspects in which sustainability is reached. Destination 

amenities, accessibility and image are characterized differently at each stage of area life cycle. These 

attributes, in turn, have various impacts on sustainability at the destination level (Modica 2012). The 

destinations examined are not rich in infrastructure. In destination A, amenities are almost entirely 

absent. In destination B, services for tourist are not distributed equitably throughout the island; there 

are some areas with few hotels and other with a wide variety of accommodation services that can 

offer all levels of comfort. Both in the narrow and broad sense, accessibility level is high. In the 

destination at the involvement stage, sustainability is primarily based on respect for natural and 

cultural heritage. In general, the destinations image are recognized worldwide. 

In analyzing the relationship between stakeholder commitment and level of sustainable tourism, 

and between stakeholders involvement and tourism destination development, different remarks can 

be highlighted. The active involvement of public and private destination stakeholders occurs in all 

the case studies, and stakeholder participation is considered a fundamental condition for sustainable 

tourism development (Modica 2015). The level of stakeholder commitment is not the same for all the 

phases of destination development. It seems to be more important in the initial stages of the 

development, and decreases with higher levels of the economic development. It is likely that young 

destination, where infrastructure and services are still insufficient, need more significant levels of 

involvement by private and public tourism actors to develop sustainable tourism. 

As limitation and future research our study can conclude that the destination in the first stage 

attribute more relevance to environmental preservation and to local culture and customs conservation. 

The destinations in advanced stage of development are focused on customer care and economic and 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

68 

social welfare of local community. In other words, the area life cycle stage does not affect the quantity 

but the quality of sustainability.  

Finally organizational should equilibrate the instruments adopted to control uncontrollable 

situational factors and adequately combine objective and subjective instruments for management 

accounting. Excessive reliance on objective performance metrics leads to business as usual, while 

new opportunities are missed out on. While, in business life nowadays, there is no room for 

demonizing objective metrics and relying on a purely subjective approach to evaluations, which 

would likely be affected by hidden pitfalls and side effects, there is a general call to avoid myopic 

evaluations and look at performance dynamically, with a continuous approach to management 

accountants’ role as risk mitigators, while considering risks and financial distress as facilitators for 

turnaround activity, which is positively centered on innovation.    

References 

Adams, C. (2020). UK aviation industry promises to be carbon neutral by 2050. The Independent, 

4 February. Retrieved February 17, 2020, from https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-

advice/aviation-industry-uk-carbon-emissions-neutral-heathrow-airport-a9316116.html. 

Adelman, S. (2017). The sustainable development goals: Anthropocentrism and neoliberalism. In 

D. French and L. Kotzé (Eds.), Sustainable development goals: Law, theory and implementation (pp. 

15–40). Edward Elgar. 

 Alexis, P. (2017). Over-tourism and anti-tourist sentiment: An exploratory analysis and 

discussion. Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, 17(2), 288–293. 

 Andriotis, K. (2018). Degrowth in tourism: Conceptual, theoretical and philosophical issues. 

CABI. Crossref. 

Arena M., Arnaboldi M., Azzone G. (2010), The organizational dynamics of enterprise risk 

management. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol. 35 Issue 7, pp. 659-675. 

Baltaretu A. (2011), Methods and indicators for measuring the impact of tourism on protected 

natural areas; pp 366-371. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

69 

Battaglia M. (2011). Non-probability sampling Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods, SAGE 

Publications. 

Baxter P. & Jack S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation 

for novice researches. The qualitative report, 13(4), 544-559. 

Berke P. R. & Conroy M. M. (2000). Are we planning for sustainable development? Journal of the 

American Planning Association, 66(1), 21-23.    

Biancone P.P., Secinaro S., Brescia V., Calandra D. (2020). Employing Value Chain Theory To 

Address COVID-19 Outbreak In Tourism Management: A Resilience and Stakeholder View. 

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH MANAGEMENT. 

Birnberg J. G. (2000), The role of behavioral research in management accounting education in 21st 

century. Issues in Accounting Education. Vol. 15 Issue 4: 713-727. 

Bocken N. P. M., Short S. W., Rana P. & Evans S. (2014). A literature and practice review to 

develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42-56. 

Brasini, S. (2010). Marketing e pubblicità: strumenti e modelli di analisi statistica, Bologna: il 

Mulino. 

Bryman A. & Bell E. (2007). Business Research Methods, Oxford University Press. 

Buckley R. (2012). Sustainable tourism: Research and reality. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 

528-546. 

Byrd E. T. (2007). Stakeholders in sustainable tourism development and their roles: applying 

stakeholders theory to sustainable tourism development. Tourism Review, 62(2), 6-13. 

Castellani V. & Sala S. (2010). Sustainable performance index for tourism policy development. 

Tourism Management, 31(6), 871-880. 

Chapman R. J. (2006), Simple Tools and Techniques for Enterprise Risk Management. John Wiley 

& Sons Ltd: Chichester (UK). 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

70 

Chenhal R. H., Morris D. (1985), The impact of structure, environment and interdependence on the 

perceived usefulness of management accounting systems (1985), The impact of structure, 

environment and interdependence on the perceived usefulness of management accounting systems. 

The Accounting Review. Vol I Issue 1, pp. 16-35. 

Clarke, J. (1997). A Framework of Approaches to Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Sustainable 

Tourism, 5(3), 224-233.  

Cook T. D. & Reichardt C. S. (1979). Qualitative and Quantitative methods in evaluation research 

(Vol. 1), SAGE publications. 

Corbetta P. (2003). La ricerca sociale: metodologia e tecniche. Le tecniche qualitative (Vol. II), 

Bologna: il Mulino. 

Coyne I.T. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging 

or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(3), 623-630. 

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approachers, 

SAGE Publications. 

Currie R. R., Seaton S. & Wesley F. (2009). Determining stakeholders for feasibility analysis. 

Annals of Tourism Research, 36(1), 41-63. 

DeNichilo S. (2020), Public Choice in European Affairs: Measuring Election Model. European 

Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy pp 19-37. Published by University of Turin. 

DeNichilo S. (2020), Shadow Bank System in European Affairs: Measuring Capability. 

Presentation discussed paper at European Association for Banking and Financial Law. Thematic 

purposed by Bankitalia Eurosistema “What to regulate? How to regulate? Who should regulate?” 

November 2020 Milan.   

Eckles D. L., Hoyt R. E., Miller S. M. (2014), The impact of enterprise risk management on the 

marginal cost of reducing risk: Evidence from the insurance in industry. Journal of Banking and 

Finance. Vol. 43 Issue 1, pp. 247-261. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

71 

Fischer J. (1995), Contingency-based research on management control systems: Categorization by 

level of complexity. Journal of Accounting Literature. Vol. 14 Issue 1, pp. 24-53. 

Galbraith J. (1973), Designing Complex Organizations. Addison Wesley Publishing Company: 

Boston, Massachusetts (USA). 

Gomm R., Hammersley M. & Foster P. (2000), Case study method: Key issues, key tests, SAGE 

Publications. 

Gordon L. A., Narayanan V. K. (1984), Management accounting systems, perceived environmental 

uncertainty and organization structure: An empirical investigation. Accounting, Organizations and 

Society. Vol. 9 Issue 1, pp. 33-47. 

Guarte, J. M., & Barrios, E. B. (2006). Estimation under purposive sampling. Communictions in 

Statistics – Simulation and Computation, 35(2), 277-284. 

Hannan M. T., Freeman J. H. (1977), The population ecology of organizations. American Journal 

of Sociology. Vol. 82 Issue 5,pp. 929-964. 

Hopper T., Bui B. (2016), Has Management Accounting Research been critical? Management 

Accounting Research. Vol. 31 Issues 1,pp. 10-30. 

Jones, T., Atkinson, H., Lorenz, A., & Harris, P. (2012). Strategic managerial accounting: 

hospitality, tourism & events applications. Goodfellow Publishers Limited. 

Kates R. W. (2011), What kind of a science in sustainability science? Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(49), 19449. 

Kates, R., Clark, W., Corell, R., Hall, J., Jaeger, C., Lowe, I., Svedin, U. (2001). Sustainability 

Science. Science, 292 (5517), 641. 

Karatzoglou, B., & Slilanis, I. (2010). Sustainable tourism in Greek island: the integration of 

activity-based environmental management with a destination environmental scorecard based on the 

adaptive resource management paradigm. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(1), 26-38.   

Kothari, C. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques: New Age International.  



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

72 

Larson, L. R., & Poudyal, N. C. (2012). Developing sustainable tourism through adaptive resource 

management: a case study of Machu Picchu, Peru. Journal of sustainable tourism, 1-22.   

Levin, S., & Clark, W. (2010). Report from Toward a Science of Sustainability Conference. Center 

of Biocomplexity, Princeton University, Princeton, N.J., and Sustainability Science Program, 

Harvard University, Cambrige, MA. 

McCook, L. J. (2010). Adaptive management of the Great Barrier Reef: a globally significant 

demonstration of the benefits of networks of marine reserves. Proceeding of the National Academy 

of Science of the United States of America, 107(43), 18278. 

Miller, G. (2001). The development of indicators for sustainable tourism: results of a Delphi survey 

of tourism researchers. Tourism Management, 22(4), 351-362. 

Miller, G., & Twining-Ward, L. (2005). Monitoring for a sustainable tourism transition: the 

challenge of developing and using indicators, Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.   

Mitchell B. (1997). Resource and environmental management, Harlow: Logman. 

Modica, P. (2008). Analisi economiche per le aziende, Roma: Aracne. 

Modica, P. (2012). Demand management for the sustainability of tourism. In D. Fennel & A. 

Holden, The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and the Environment, London: Routledge. 

Modica, P. (2015). Sustainable Tourism Management and Monitoring Destination, Business and 

Stakeholder Perspectives.   

O’Riordan, T. (1981). Environmentalis, London: Pion.  

Page, S. J. (2010). Scenario Planning as a tool to understand uncertainty in tourism: the example 

of transport and tourism in Scotland in 2025. Current Issue in Tourism, 13(2), 99-137. 

Palermo T., Van der Stede W. A. (2011), Scenario budgeting. Integrating risk and performance. 

Finance and Management. January 2011,pp. 10-13. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

73 

Plummer, R., & Fennell, D. (2009). Managing protected areas for sustainable tourism: prospects 

for adaptive co-management. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(2), 149-168. 

Power M. (2007), Organized Uncertainty: Designing a World of Risk Management. Oxford 

University Press: Oxford (UK). 

Power M. (2009), The risk management of nothing. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol. 

34 Issue 6-7,pp. 849-855. 

Ryan C. (2002). Equity, management, power sharing and sustainability – issues of the “new 

tourism”. Tourism Management, 23(1), 17-26. 

Sautter E. T. & Leisen B. (1999). Managing stakeholders a tourism planning model. Annals of 

Tourism Research, 21(3), 312-328. 

Stake R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research, SAGE publications. 

Stake R. E. (2013). Multiple case study analysis, Guilford Press. 

Stoval, W., Higham, J., & Stephenson, J. (2019). Prepared for take-off? Anthropogenic climate 

change and the global challenge of twenty-first century tourism. In D. Timothy (Ed.), Handbook of 

Globalization and Tourism (pp. 174–187). Edward Elgar. 

Suri H. (2011). Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qualitative Research Journal, 

11(2), 63.  

Swarbrooke, J. (1999). Sustainable Tourism Management, Cabi. 

Thomas, D.R. (2006). A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data. 

American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237-246. 

Torkington, K., Stanford, D., & Guiver, J. (2020). Discourse(s) of growth and sustainability in 

national tourism policies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(7), 1041–

1062. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.170695. 



   
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/5516 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

74 

Van der Stede W. A. (2011), Management accounting research in the wake of the crisis: Some 

reflections. European Accounting Review. Vol. 20 Issue 4,pp. 605-623. 

Van der Stede W. A. (2015), Management accounting: Where from, where now, where to? Journal 

of Management Accounting Research. Vol 27 Issue 1,pp. 171-176.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  


