Accessibility of Sports Sites and Facilities in Mid-Mountain Areas: Challenges in Promoting the “Tourisme & Handicap” Brand. A Study of the Hautes-Pyrénées Region

This study focuses on public programs designed to promote and identify sports offerings certified under the “Tourisme & Handicap” label. The study seeks to explain the extent to which these programs achieve (or fail to achieve) the results expected by the “Tourisme et Handicap” policy. Based on semi-structured interviews with tourism stakeholders specializing in sports and based in the Hautes-Pyrénées department, this research has shed light on the reasons behind the behavioral discrepancies observed among the professionals interviewed. In this study, we highlight the heterogeneity and diversity of the stakeholders involved in the “Tourism & Handicap” policy, which may partly explain its difficulties in achieving results. Beyond this research, our article seeks to raise readers’ awareness of the inequalities faced by people with disabilities when going on vacation and to encourage them to reflect on the importance of promoting and communicating about accessible offerings.

Fifteen years after the entry into force of Law No. 2005-102 of February 11, 2005, “on equal rights and opportunities, participation, and citizenship for people with disabilities,” Emmanuel Macron acknowledged at the^5th National Conference on Disability (2020) that France is not fully compliant across all sectors of activity. This law stipulated that, as of January 1, 2015, all public-access facilities (^ERP1) must be accessible to everyone, including people with disabilities, regardless of their specific limitations. The concept of accessibility means that everyone must be able to enter and exit ERP facilities, but also that the services provided must be adapted. The Accessibility Act promised full social participation for everyone in all areas of life, based on the principles of equality and non-discrimination: “Everyone must therefore be able to access the goods and services offered by society, regardless of the sector in question, including the tourism sector” (Degros, 2013, p. 99).

Currently, there are significant inequalities in the ability of people with^special needs to take vacations^.² The qualitative study conducted in 1993 by Oxley and Richard (Reichhart, 2013) shows that the difficulty of finding an accessible destination is the main barrier to travel for people with disabilities. One of the major obstacles to travel highlighted by Blaho-Poncé (2013) is a lack of access to reliable information about accessible travel options. The ability to travel independently appears to be another key factor in deciding to go on vacation. Generally speaking, this freedom of movement influences the frequency, duration, and geographic scope of vacations (Atout France, 2010). This observation gives rise to various challenges related to improving the accessibility of tourism facilities and services. First and foremost, tourist sites and establishments should begin the process of obtaining the “Tourisme & Handicap” (T&H) certification.

An Integration Policy and Its State Seal

The “Tourism and Disability” public policy has helped strengthen the protective measures of disability policies (Revillard, 2017). It contributes to the creation of social order and the resolution of social conflicts (Lascoumes, Le Galès, 2018). In the tourism sector, the disability community—including associations of people living with disabilities, such as^{the APF3}—is growing impatient and calling for the concrete implementation of public policies stemming from the new accessibility law. Today, the policy for identifying “Tourism and Disability” offerings helps reduce inequalities in access to vacation opportunities. Since 2001, the Tourisme & Handicap association—and now the^{DIRRECTE4 offices}—have been working to support tourism professionals seeking to obtain the T&H certification. The state-recognized T&H certification applies to various^{facilities⁵} that meet the diverse expectations and needs of tourists during their stays.

The objective of this program is to develop the T&H brand across all sectors of the tourism industry (lodging, dining, attractions, recreational activities, and the tourist office). Its goal is to create a “tourism offering that is tailored and integrated into the general tourism offering ” (T&H, 2013) and to create accessibility pathways that facilitate the planning of specialized vacations (Blaho-Poncé, 2013). T&H is the only government-sponsored brand dedicated to ensuring equal rights for tourism professionals and the exercise of their citizenship. In the area of vacations, it organizes adapted, mixed-group, and inclusive vacation packages.

that are committed to a quality initiative focused on making recreation and vacations accessible to everyone. This T&H certification is part of a very strict and standardized process. The rigorous application of these standards therefore enhances the brand’s credibility in the eyes of consumers. The uniformity of the certification provides a quality guarantee that is appreciated and valued by tourists with specific needs (Marcotte et al., 2011). The government-issued certification thus helps “reduce consumers’ perception of risk” (Marcotte et al., 2011, pp. 208–207). Its mere presence certifies full or partial travel independence, encourages people to go on vacation, and reduces the risk associated with choosing a tourist destination.

As of March 2022, the website tourisme-handicap.gouv.fr listed 4,120 tourist establishments with T&H certification, with 91% catering to hearing impairments, 96% to intellectual disabilities, 76% to mobility impairments, and 66% to visual impairments, compared to 3,346 in 2009 (Atout France, 2011). This indicates a growth in the number of certified establishments. However, this “does not preclude the possibility that facilities may be accessible in accordance with the legislation in effect since 2005 without necessarily seeking certification” (Amiaud, 2012, p. 34). Professionals interviewed by this author explained that they did not feel the need to pursue certification, which, in their view, could lead to a new form of stigmatization and would not serve to enhance an establishment’s reputation (Amiaud, 2012). Having covered the theoretical aspects, we can now move on to the next section, which examines the attitudes of certified tourism professionals toward the T&H certification.

Government initiatives and the implementation of programs to promote the local offerings

The successful implementation of the “Tourism and Disability” public policy is closely linked to efforts to identify and promote certified facilities. Once facilities have been identified, it is important to highlight what is accessible in order to inform the relevant population. The Atout France team (2011) surveyed 616 certified professionals about their use of the certification and their communication strategies. Among members of the T&H network, differences in behavior regarding the use of the certification were observed. The study classified certified professionals according to several types of behavior related to the certification and its use. (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Classification of Certified Sites (Atout France, 2011)

The “Convinced Opportunists,” as the study calls them, account for 32% of the certified facility managers in the survey. For them, committing to the certification process aligned with the need to carry out renovations on their premises. They express awareness of disability issues. These organizations, most of which are small, view the certification as a means of differentiation and see the label as a competitive advantage. However, their promotional efforts related to this label remain rare. The organizations justify this lack of promotion by stating that they do not need to attract more customers. Another category of professionals, called the “Rationals ” (23%), are larger establishments, such as hotels or those offering outdoor activities. They are very active in their promotional efforts and aim to expand their customer base, particularly among seniors. While sensitivity to disability-related issues exists, it is not the primary motivation behind their efforts (Atout France, 2011). Finally, the “Mixed Results” group accounts for 31%. They are characterized by a high level of awareness regarding disability. Most have been approached and supported by tourism organizations to participate in the certification process. However, their communication efforts are very limited and not very active. This shortcoming is often attributed to a lack of human and material resources.

Drawing on the theoretical framework developed by Lascoumes and Le Galès (2018), we will attempt to better understand these behavioral discrepancies in the use of the label by applying the sociology of public action. These authors have studied the various barriers associated with the practical implementation of public policies. One of these barriers relates to the diversity and heterogeneity of the actors involved in these policies. It is clear that tourism stakeholders are highly diverse and are not subject to the same type of governance or the same interests. “They regularly clash over their objectives and means of action” (Lascoumes, Le Galès, 2018, p. 15). We might wonder whether their diversity acts as a barrier to the use of methods for identifying and promoting the T&H label, given their divergent interests and governance models. The work of these authors has shown that public policies implemented using a ^{top-down model⁶} have been more fragile in their implementation compared to those developed using a bottom-up model. This model is often perceived as overly authoritarian by stakeholders, and the programs adopted are seen as lacking coherence and rationality on the part of decision-makers (Lascoumes, Le Galès, 2018). For example, the requirement to make all public buildings accessible following the law of February 11, 2005, is based on a top-down model . This contrasts with the certification process, which is largely based on a bottom-up model, as it most often stems from a voluntary commitment on the part of stakeholders who are subsequently supported by public authorities in their efforts.

This article will therefore seek to examine the extent to which tourism professionals contribute to the promotion of the destinations they have made accessible. We will also attempt to understand their role in implementing promotional programs and identifying certified tourism offerings. A field study conducted in a mid-mountain region among certified sports tourism professionals will enable us to carry out an empirical study and test our research hypotheses.

Methodology

To begin our analysis, we interviewed several T&H-certified professionals. It seemed obvious to us that we should conduct a qualitative study in order to gain greater depth in our data analysis. The method chosen was to conduct semi-structured interviews. This approach is considered effective for gathering “the opinions of the interviewees, as well as the contextual, social, and linguistic elements necessary for understanding those opinions” (Duchesne, 2000, p. 2).

Five semi-structured interviews, lasting 20 to 40 minutes, were conducted to help us understand the connections between the various experiences of certified tourism stakeholders and their communication programs regarding the certification. These explanatory interviews will help us gain a deeper understanding, through their accounts, of the challenges associated with promoting accessible sites. We seek to understand the involvement of professionals in public programs designed to identify certified tourism offerings and why these programs do not meet their needs.

These interviews were conducted with private and public stakeholders based in the Hautes-Pyrénées. We felt it would be interesting to choose a mountainous department that, due to its topography, is difficult for tourists with specific needs to access—particularly those with limited mobility. In our study, we sought to highlight the efforts made by business owners to make facilities accessible and/or adapt them. Such work can be labor-intensive and costly in a region as^rugged⁷ as the Pyrenees. The selected sample includes tourism professionals involved in outdoor sports and recreational activities. To ensure the sample’s diversity, we varied the characteristics of the stakeholders based on their governance structure, the type of sports services they offer, the year they obtained the certification, and their classification (see Figure 1).

An interview guide was developed in advance to structure the interviews and ensure a consistent thread throughout each one. The four themes listed below were addressed to help us answer the research question. The initial phase focused on the certification process required for accreditation. The rest of the interview addressed the communication channels used, followed by the nature of relationships and interactions within stakeholder groups at the local level. To conclude, we asked for an assessment of the brand from their perspective and that of their customers. The comparative table below highlights the key characteristics of each organization interviewed and allows us to emphasize their diversity.

The diversity of our sample of stakeholders is particularly evident in terms of size, their reach within the Hautes-Pyrénées region, and their governance structure.

A Comprehensive Analysis of the Implementation of Identification and Promotion Programs

Factors Influencing the Certification Process

The reasons for joining the T&H network vary among the professionals surveyed. Within public organizations, we observed that the certification processes generally began after construction or renovation work was completed. Valérie Nogué, manager of a climbing gym in the Gavarnie Valley, confirms that this social initiative was spearheaded by local elected officials and departmental agencies, then coordinated by public authorities acting on behalf of the government, at the initiative of the Villaris town hall. “In fact, the accessibility features for people with disabilities were installed when the building was constructed. It was part of that same initiative.” The climbing gym is classified as a public access building (ERP) because it is a public facility open to everyone. The facility was therefore required to ensure accessibility (top-down). However, since the certification is a voluntary process, it was a proactive effort that prompted local elected officials to initiate these modifications.

For the Gaves Greenway, its certification coincided with the redevelopment of the trail, which was formerly a railroad track. Its virtually flat terrain has made it easily accessible. Marie-Lys, director of the Lourdes Tourist Office: “They took advantage of this site, which was already quite accessible by nature, to certify it by installing certain amenities that met the criteria of the ‘Tourisme Handicap’ certification.” From a legal standpoint, the Greenway, considered a Public Facility (IOP), is not subject to any accessibility requirements. We can therefore describe this as a certification granted as a matter of convenience in conjunction with a trail renovation project. It is interesting to note that the officials interviewed are aware of this information—a sign of clear and consistent communication between stakeholders and project managers.

Compared to private facilities, most managers learned about the certification through its promoters, such as DIRRECTE, and/or through organizations in direct contact with people living with disabilities of any kind. In the case of the Cla-Haras equestrian center, the investments had been made prior to the certification process.

“We wanted to create a center that would be accessible to everyone.” The facility already partially met the criteria when they were approached by the certification program’s evaluators. “They contacted us and asked if we wanted to apply for the certification. They told us we’d need to make some additional improvements—such as to the restrooms, signage, and so on.” Clara , manager of the equestrian center.

The results are the same for the dog-sledding activity. Ingrid, the instructor, explains that her equipment was already accessible before the certification process began. Offering adapted services was a personal goal that came to fruition through the completion of specialized disability sports training for dog-sledding. “ I had earned my disability sports certification quite a few years ago, and it was a guy (…) who suggested I get certified by ‘Tourisme et Handicap.’ So, in fact, representatives from the certification program came to my site to check accessibility, the restrooms, the activities, etc.—the equipment I provided for my activities for people with mobility impairments and various disabilities. So they certified me for all four types of disabilities.” The accessibility of their services is the result of voluntary,bottom-up initiatives that prompted them to begin the certification process and meet its criteria. In both cases, our interviewees were approached and encouraged by certification program representatives to join the “Tourisme & Handicap” network.

In an effort to examine the relationship between professionals’ awareness of disability and the efforts they make, we found that in the public sector, managers do not necessarily have personal experience living with a disability. The certification of their facilities is driven either by a legal requirement or by an opportunity arising from renovation projects. In contrast, we observe that certified private-sector entities seem to demonstrate greater sensitivity to the challenges faced by people living with disabilities. This sensitivity appears to foster proactive efforts to provide adapted services. “I provide equine-assisted therapy for people with disabilities. I use this time with the horses to work with people who have neurological disorders. ” Clara . It is evident that their determination to obtain certification goes far beyond commercial motivation. There is a commitment to providing assistance and acting in solidarity with people with disabilities. “I think there’s a need to make the activity accessible to everyone, really.” “It’s rewarding, but in a different way—on a human level.” Ingrid

Tools used to promote the certified product line

Publicly managed facilities, such as the climbing gym, the Pic du Jer Funicular, and the Gaves Greenway, have chosen to promote their T&H certification primarily through digital channels such as websites, social media, and blogs. All of the organizations surveyed report being listed on the websites of the Tourisme & Handicap association, their local tourism office, and the^HPTE8 department. According to Valérie, an employee at the climbing gym: “There’s nothing special about it, really—it’s just highlighted on the label’s dedicated website.” She confirmed to us during the interview that the center is listed on the tourist office’s website and that of the Vallée de Gavarnie tourism agency. “I haven’t checked this year, but we were definitely listed there last year .” Jean-Marc from the Funicular. Regarding the Voie Verte, following the updates made to the Lourdes Tourist Office’s website, Marie-Lyse assures us that “there will be a page dedicated to accessibility in relation to its tourism offerings, particularly those with the label.” The managers of these facilities report changes to the booking platforms. We’ll increasingly see information on these sites—in the form of a note (comment, label, or icon)—regarding the site’s accessibility and the adaptation of services. “We’re going to have a brand-new online booking system due to COVID capacity limits, and yes, we’ll definitely highlight that during the booking process.” Jean-Marc from the Funicular.

In comparison, activities run by private organizations—such as the equestrian center and dog-sledding tours—primarily promote their accessibility through more traditional channels like posters, flyers, magazines, brochures, and so on. Ingrid, a dog-sled guide, does not have a website and prefers to rely on word of mouth. “Since centers for people with disabilities communicate a lot with each other, that’s how I get new contracts or new opportunities.” The equestrian center wanted to put up a large sign at its entrance specifying the certification. “We put it up for the public who come to visit us at the facility, so they can see right away that it’s a certified center.” The equestrian center, for example, is very proactive in its efforts. The facility’s accessibility is highlighted in several specialized horseback riding guides for people with disabilities. “There’s a guide called ‘Equi-Handi,’ which I’ve applied to be listed in. (…) There are other magazines as well, but I don’t remember their exact names—though I know we’re featured in them.” Clara , manager of the equestrian center.

In summary, we observe that the majority of the organizations surveyed make an effort to communicate about the accessibility of their site and their accreditation. We note that an organization’s capacity to accommodate visitors and the attractiveness of its surroundings influence the quantity and diversity of promotional efforts. Professionals capable of hosting groups of people with disabilities are more inclined to promote their facilities. The Voie Verte des Gaves is an example of a major site heavily frequented by pedestrians and cyclists, as is the Cla’Haras center, which has more than 80 horses in board at its stables. Both serve as models to follow in terms of efforts to promote the label. The limited communication efforts of small organizations

can be explained by the fact that there is no need to attract more visitors; this is the case for Ingrid and her sled dogs. We also observe that professionals who are aware of the label’s role as a mark of quality and a way to stand out from the competition tend to highlight it more prominently. To deepen our analysis, we need to establish a connection between these different behaviors regarding the use of the label and the relationships among certified professionals operating within the same region.

Channels of collaboration among stakeholders

These semi-structured interviews allowed us to examine the various existing—or nonexistent—collaborations between tourism professionals and organizations serving people with disabilities. The results highlighted the strong interactions between private organizations and these associations. The equestrian center and the dog-sledding organization told us that they regularly interact with organizations located both within and outside the Hautes-Pyrénées department. Clara explained that she has a partnership with the departmental committee for adapted sports, which allows her to be contacted regularly by centers for people with disabilities and to host groups on multiple occasions. “So we work with them regularly, and they’re the ones who handle the logistics with the facilities. We host open houses to introduce people to adapted horseback riding, and we also provide therapy sessions for patients from specialized centers—often run by nonprofit organizations.” Ingrid also works with nonprofit organizations in the field of disability services. Groups organize outings and regularly come to try out her adapted dog-sledding program. “I’ve worked with several centers that aren’t necessarily the closest ones. Then there’s Le Bialais’, which is in (…) or other centers that reach out to me every year.”

As for institutional actors, their ties to organizations are far less obvious. Our two managers in charge of the certified program state that, to date, they have no partnerships with groups of people living with disabilities. Valérie from the climbing gym adds , “As for organizations, not really—not to my knowledge…” We find an identical response in the testimony of Marie-Lys from Lourdes. She explains that travel organizations in Lourdes, such as Les Diocèses and Sanctuaire, already have a monopoly on accessible trips and do not seek assistance from the Tourist Office. In the case of the funicular, the site manager states that he does not engage with disability-related organizations. His only contact with these organizations occurs when instructors come to provide training in handcycling at the Domaine du Jer several times a year. To interpret these results, we observe that the main commonalities among the stakeholders who maintain the most relationships with members of the T&H network are: their private governance status and their strong awareness of disability issues.

A few theoretical points are worth noting. In the case of privately managed facilities, the certification process follows a bottom-up model; that is, the steps taken are the result of voluntary actions on the part of the managers. This contrasts with public organizations, where the certification process was driven by local elected officials and the departmental committee, without consultation with the managers. In their case, the certification process follows a top-down model .

As noted earlier, we know that public policies implemented using a top-down model have been more prone to difficulties in their implementation (Lascoumes, Le Galès, 2018). Publicly funded organizations, such as the climbing gym, the Domaine du Jer, and the Voie Verte, do not demonstrate the same level of sensitivity toward people with disabilities. Furthermore, as the survey demonstrated, these organizations report having more limited ties with disability advocacy groups. According to Gacoin (2010), trends in public policy suggest that the creation of partnerships increases the likelihood of successful implementation.

The “Hérault Mobility^{” app⁹} is a good example of a technological tool designed through an “institutional” approach that came about as a result of collaboration among various stakeholders. It is the result of a joint project, implemented by local government agencies in the Hérault department, aimed at creating a tool to promote tailored tourism offerings (Brisset et al., 2020). The launch of this app demonstrates that “regional social dialogue” between different levels of government and the label’s promoters can increase the visibility of regional tourism offerings (Brisset et al., 2020). We can therefore only encourage dialogue among tourism stakeholders with the shared goal of speaking with one voice to publicize the label. Collaborations of this kind consequently enhance the T&H label’s reach and contribute to its promotion.

Conclusion

Highlighting the accessibility of facilities with the “Tourisme & Handicap” certification requires a coherent approach to public policy and its action programs. This study sought to identify the obstacles to programs aimed at identifying and promoting certified sports facilities located in the Hautes-Pyrénées region. We found that attitudes toward the T&H label vary from one professional to another, depending on the status of the certified organization (public or private), the managers’ sensitivity toward people with disabilities, and the facility’s capacity to accommodate visitors.

The purpose of this comprehensive analysis is to issue recommendations and propose areas for improvement regarding our initial problem statement. To meet the needs of the target audience—tourists with specific needs—we must focus on involving business owners in the certification process. By examining the implementation of programs designed to promote certified offerings, this article has established the bottom-up model as the benchmark for the certification process. This model not only involves business owners but also helps raise awareness of the challenges that tourists with specific needs may face during their vacations.

To promote a facility’s accessibility, it is important to expand the range of communication tools by drawing on diverse sources. Among traditional methods (posters, flyers) and digital methods (reservation platforms, search engine optimization), we have emphasized the importance of building partnerships among the various stakeholders. “The involvement of diverse stakeholders and institutions—public, regional, private, and nonprofit—is the primary strength and driving force behind social development projects.” (Gacoin, 2010, p. 83). Public and private interest groups facilitate the implementation of programs to promote certified offerings across a region. It would be beneficial to support certified organizations in developing relationships with stakeholders in the disability sector, as well as with other members of the T&H network.

This article has sought to provide a better understanding of the “Tourisme et Handicap” policy and to lay the groundwork for the development of an action plan aimed at improving the visibility of certified tourism offerings. It has proposed recommendations intended to inform the thinking and actions of current and prospective certified stakeholders. The scope of the conclusions that can be drawn from this study must, however, be qualified. The individual analysis of a few certified tourism professionals provides only a partial view of how communication and promotion programs for the T&H label are developed. Drawing on works such as that of Amiaud (2012), it would be interesting to expand our investigation to include seaside resorts. We could then observe whether the involvement of professionals in the policy to promote the T&H label is linked to the political strategies of local authorities and the department, or simply to the characteristics of the region. Ultimately, it is through the combination of these different perspectives that a more comprehensive understanding of the consequences of public policy will emerge.

Bibliography

Amiaud, D. (2012). Public Policy on “Tourism and Disability”: From the Local Level to the Regional Level. Mondes du tourisme, vol. 5, 31–46

Atout France. (2010). Adapting Tourism Offerings to People with Disabilities. Market Study: The Population of People with

Disability and France’s tourism offerings. 1–125.

Blaho-Poncé, C. (2013). The Accessibility Chain: The Cornerstone of Access to Tourism for People with Disabilities. Téoros. 32(2), 104–115. Brisset, L., Blaho-Poncé, C., & Le Roux, N. (2020). E-Accessibility in Tourism: The Case of the “Hérault” Mobile App

"Mobility" as a Tool for Inclusive Public Policy? Nature & Recreation. No. 8 , 91–100.

Duchesne, S. (2000). The Practice of the So-Called “Non-Directive” Interview. Methods in Practice. Approaches, Forms of

Experience and Fields of Inquiry in Political Science, by Myriam Bachir. Presses Universitaires de France, 9–30.

Degros, E. (2013). Accessibility and French Law: The Perspective of Sustainable Tourism, Equal for All. Téoros, 32 (2), 96–103.

Gacoin, D. (2010). Understanding Diversity: Leading Social Action Projects. Paris: Dunod. 67–100.

Lascoumes, P., Le Galès, P. (2018). Sociology of Public Action – 2nd edition. Armand Colin. E-book, 1–128.

Marcotte, P., Bourdeau, L., Leroux, E. (2011). Branding and Labels in Tourism: Hesitations and Challenges. Management & Avenir. 47(7), 205–222.

Revillard, A. (2017). The Reception of Disability Policies: An Approach Based on Biographical Interviews. Revue française de sociologie. 58 (1), 71–95.

Reichhart, F., Lomo Myazhiom, A-C. (2013). Accessibility and Communication: How Can We Make What Is Accessible Visible? The Case of Tourist Information for People with Disabilities in France. L’Harmattan. 53–64.

1 Public-access facilities (ERP) are buildings, premises, and enclosures to which members of the public are admitted. For example, schools, stores, and amusement parks are ERP facilities. (service-gouv.fr)

2 “Like the general population, the population of people with disabilities is made up of individuals with diverse abilities and, of course, different needs when they travel. The range of disabilities is broad; the five major categories of impairments are: motor, visual, intellectual, hearing, and associated disabilities, which should be distinguished from one another. ” (Blaho-Poncé, 2013, p. 105)

3 APF (Association France Handicap, its new name for the past two years) advocates at the national level in all departments to enable people with disabilities to benefit from the “Tourism & Disability” policy and to meet the criteria of the national “Tourisme & Handicap” (T&H) certification standards. Secondly, the challenge—which will be the very focus of this study—is to identify accessible sites and services by cataloging and promoting them (through guides, brochures, or online portals) (Reichhart, 2013).

4 Regional Directorate for Business, Competition, Consumer Affairs, Labor, and Employment.

5 Among the certified establishments, the following are worth noting: museums, eco-museums, and craft centers; restaurants; tourist offices and tourist information centers; sites offering sports or outdoor activities; campgrounds; educational farms and wildlife parks; castles, churches, and monuments; parks, gardens, and hiking trails; wineries and local gourmet restaurants; convention centers; theaters and movie theaters; tourist trains; theme parks; beaches; etc. (T&H, 2013)

6 A public policy model that prioritizes actions “imposed” from “above,” with little consultation with the stakeholders responsible for implementing them. This model would contrast with a“bottom-up” approach—that is , a public policy that emerges “from the bottomup ” and is co-constructed with and among the stakeholders involved (Lascoumes, Le Galès, 2018).

7 A section of ground with uneven terrain, bumps, and dips, making it difficult to walk on

⁸ HPTE: Hautes-Pyrénées Tourism and Environment. A private reservation agency and information center affiliated with the Hautes-Pyrénées Departmental Council. https://www.tourisme- hautes-pyrenees.com/

9 Hérault Mobility is a mobile app designed to make it easier for people with disabilities to get around while on vacation. It provides a travel route—with varying levels of accessibility—based on a directory (stores, hotels, restaurants, sports and cultural facilities, etc.) of establishments certified as “Tourism and Disability” and a “travel chain ” (roads, public transportation) that have been evaluated as part of a region’s application for the “Destination Pour Tous” certification. It is promoted by the Hérault department. (Brisset et al., 2020)