The Host Community and Its Rol

sustainability
Article
The Host Community and Its Role in Sports
Tourism—Exploring an Emerging Research Field
Valentin Herbold *, Hannes Thees and Julian Philipp
Chair of Tourism, Center for Entrepreneurship, Catholic University of Eichstaett-Ingolstadt, 85072 Eichstätt,
Germany; [email protected] (H.T.); [email protected] (J.P.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Received: 31 October 2020; Accepted: 10 December 2020; Published: 15 December 2020
Abstract: The increase in individual sports activities is stimulating the rise of sport-related forms
of vacationing. This is further intensified by tourists seeking authentic experiences in host–guest
relations, physical health and well-being, and the consumption of local products and services.
Communities, especially those in developing countries, do not yet fully recognize the potential of
local sports as a resource and competitive advantage in their destination development. In the same
way, tourism research is lacking analyses regarding the role of the community and its specific sports
identity. Given this, the present paper aims to systematically review the promising interface between
community development and sports tourism. The research questions are based on the potential of
identity-based sports and necessary local engagement. These efforts are pursued through a Systematic
Literature Review (SLR) with 49 articles. The results reveal the thematic clusters, research features,
and prevalent challenges and benefits that the community has to deal with. The discussion proposes
the utilization of local sports identity in systematic product development and highlights increasing
local engagement. In conclusion, we call for future research on non-event-related sports tourism,
in-depth case studies, and multi-disciplinary concepts to foster local sustainability.
Keywords: local community; sports tourism; community-based tourism; local engagement; local
sports identity; systematic literature review
1. Introduction and Problem Definition

The COVID-19 pandemic and the related social and physical distancing have disrupted many
regular aspects of sport and physical activity. Simultaneously, COVID-19 has amplified trends related to
natural awareness, mental- and physical health, and well-being [1]. Moreover, these circumstances have
led to a boom in independent sports activities, especially running [2–4]. In combination with changing
consumer behavior and a value shift in some societal layers, the potential for sports tourism has
emerged. Sports tourism covers more than mega-events (e.g., the Olympic Games), which have been
prevalent in impact assessments and created a rather negative image of mega infrastructure projects.
For a long time, sports events were regarded too uncritically, and their value in long-term regional
development was not questioned. The involvement of the population in decisions about hosting major
sports events, such as the bid for the Olympic Games, has shown an especially strong divergence of
local opinions in recent years [5–7].
Those factors call for an examination of the extent to which locals can benefit from sports tourism.
Indeed, sports have the potential to bring people together worldwide [8,9]. In particular, small-scale
events provide an opportunity for close guest–host relationships [10–13]. These relationships can be
further supported by more traditional sports activities ranging from those with low infrastructure and
equipment requirements, such as running and street soccer, to those with extended requirements, such
as skiing, motorsports, or golf.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 10488; doi:10.3390/su122410488 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, 10488 2 of 26
Such sports are frequently practiced and likely rooted in local identity, thus reflecting a community’s
image [14,15]. In parts of Northern England and the Ruhr Area, soccer is the primary pace-setting
sport and has a multi-dimensional influence on social life [16]. Further examples are ice hockey in
Scandinavian countries and Canada [17], skiing in Alpine regions [18], and running in the plateaus of East
Africa [19]. These destinations utilize their particular sports traditions in touristic offers that generate
local income, jobs, production in value-added stages, and authentic experiences for tourists [20,21].
The worldwide pandemic has shown how sensitive some tourism destinations are to immense
transformation processes. In many places, unilateral tourism strategies became fatal for key stakeholders,
as well as primarily uninvolved members of the hosting communities. Since the United Nations
proclaimed 2017 the international year of sustainable tourism [22], tourism scholars have engaged with
several concepts, models, and theories for sustainable tourism development. Reflecting on the United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals [23], the community gains high importance in self-determined
development to meet residents’ needs. Transferred to tourism development, this concept means stressing
local strengths and minimizing dependencies by gaining management control of touristic products and
services. Such aims are widely included in the concepts of Community-Based Tourism (CBT).
The thematic fields of sports tourism and CBT are researched thoroughly throughout the scientific
discourse but have only been considered separately so far. Scholars have addressed existing research
gaps when exploring the social impacts of sports tourism on host communities [24–27], linking the
model of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in sports with community value [28], comparing the
roles of multiple stakeholder groups [29], or analyzing sustainable management practices [30]. Thus,
“future research needs to integrate aspects of culture, sport and tourism that shape events and their potential to
optimize social utility, including synergizing economic and social goals in the context of regional community and
sport tourism development” [31] (p. 24). We identified a lack of analysis related to the community’s role,
with its perception of place and identity, which is significantly influenced by prevalent sports activities,
and the resulting potential for alternative tourism product development lead by local stakeholders
(Section 2).
Against this background, this study focuses on the following research framework (Figure 1),
which involves using a Systematic Literature Review to identify critical issues and combine findings at
the interface of community development and sports tourism.
Figure 1. Research Framework on the Interface of Sports Tourism and Community Development
Source: Own elaboration.
2. Theoretical Background: Sports Tourism in the Context of Community Development

This study builds upon three mutually dependent fields of interest related to local sports tourism:
Community, Tourism, and Sports. In our understanding, Tourism, among other things, acts as a tool
for economic value creation, which positively impacts the host community under suitable conditions.
We observe the community at the local level and discuss the production of place identity and its
influence on the existence of historically predominant sports activities [32]. These sports activities form
the basis for alternative tourism product development, which again affects the local community. In
this triangle of key concepts, we identified local sports tourism as a connecting element, which also
serves the normative idea of sustainable destination development. The formulated research questions
(RQs) address the potential in utilizing sports activities with strong identity-forming characteristics
for CBT (RQ 1). In this way, we explore the community and the role of its members in developing
products and services for sports tourism (RQ 2).
2.1. Community and Community Development

Community development entails a normative perspective, which requires operationalization
and concretization. To ensure a close link to community development, the scope of the term
“community” needs to be defined first. According to Billings (2000) [33], a community can refer
to those in the same geographical area, those who share similar interests, a feeling of belonging,
shared cultural and ethnic values, or even a shared way of life. For the present study, we use the
definition proposed by Matarrita-Cascanta and Brennan (2012) [34], wherein a community is “a
locality comprised by people residing in a geographical area; the resources such people require to subsist and
progress; and the processes in which such individuals engage to distribute and exchange such resources to
fulfill local needs and wants” (p. 295). Broader structural or economic changes and trends often call
for the ongoing development of communities [35]. Since the 1960s, community development has
evolved from being centered around economic needs to more modern and more holistic approaches
that include a variety of economic, cultural, social, and environmental aspects [36]. Multiple actors
are involved in community development, such as governments, banks, private corporations, city
councils, intermediaries, foundations, community development corporations, existing local businesses,
and residents [37]. In terms of sustainability, well-developed communities are more likely to succeed
in sustainable economic growth [38].
There are various forms of community development. As proposed by Frisch and Servon
(2006) [37], communities may build their development around four trends: asset (or resource)-based
trends, which means to build up assets that already exist; market-oriented trends, which refers to
business development and local needs; social capital-oriented trends, which means to support the
production and provision of information; or faith-based trends. The common focus of these approaches
is to merge and build resources to improve the quality and well-being of the residents [35].
2.2. Community-Based Tourism as a Development Approach

Within the abovementioned resource-based or market-oriented development forms, tourism is
often perceived as a tool to achieve community development through either a community model
or a corporate model [39]. A key success factor involves integrating the corporate model into a
community-based development approach [40]. The community model comprises numerous individual
tourism operators—mostly family-run businesses—and builds upon a consensus-based coordination
system and a negotiated strategy or vision instead of top-down authorities and control systems [39,41].
This model can strengthen the ability of local identity and the cautious use of natural resources and
mutual trust to reach a consensus in decision-making. However, a short-term strategic perspective and
organizational barriers may prevent innovation [42]. Due to societal changes, the increasing relevance
of sustainability and tourism-specific challenges (e.g., overtourism), alternative tourism forms that
fulfil tourists’ need for authentic experiences are increasingly important [43]. Alternative tourism may
also support the broader development goals of a community by promoting participation alongside
cultural and environmental considerations [36,44]. Popular forms of alternative tourism are shown in
Table 1.
Table 1. Alternative Forms of Tourism.
Form Characteristics Problems/Issues

Close relationship to the environment,
Establishing control and management
Responsible economy, culture, and society
frameworks for external corporations in terms
tourism Economic benefits for locals
of social justice
Enhances well-being
Upgrading the local contribution and benefits
Conserving the environment, sustaining
Ecotourism in opposition to external operators and market
the well-being of locals
players
Actors from developed countries may leverage
Fair trade Building sustainable supply chains and
control over developing ones
tourism distributing benefits fairly
Control of licensing remains external
Increasing benefits for the poor
Partially used as an instrument for capitalist
Pro-poor-tourism Contributing to poverty reduction by
penetration due to international cooperation
unlocking opportunities
Community-based Local ownership/management of Possible lack of local skills/capabilities and risk
tourism tourism products of conflicts due to missing coordination system
Source: Own illustration based on Giampiccoli and Saayman (2014) [36].
Wandera et al. (2016) [45] highlighted the importance of involving residents and considering their
needs in the decision-making and execution processes of community development. Therefore, the
focus of this paper lies in community-based tourism (CBT). In contrast to the former concepts, CBT uses
a bottom-up approach to minimize leakages of power and capital and, thus, ensures that the control,
management, and revenues of tourism predominantly stay within the community. Consequently,
CBT may help break dependence from external or even foreign corporations [46–48]. This is in line
with Okazaki (2008), who depicts CBT as predominantly encompassing “community participation,
including the ‘ladder of citizen participation’, power redistribution, collaboration processes and social capital
creation” [49] (p. 512). According to Giampiccoli et al. (2016), there are three CBT models: (1) A single,
community-owned structure that is owned and managed by community members; (2) multiple micro
and small enterprises under a common organizational umbrella, which are owned and managed by
community members; and (3) a joint venture or partnership between the community and some of
its members and business partners [48]. Through each of these models, benefits can be distributed
more equally among community members or even give them access to a permanent livelihood
alternative while ensuring sustainable development and protection of the economy, society, and the
environment [50].
In terms of socio-economics, CBT can contribute significantly to an increase in personal income [51]
and hence living standards [52]. On a societal level, this can overcome the cultural disruption of
tourism [53], strengthen local families, and counteract the exodus of labor and capital [54]. Together,
the aforementioned impacts, as well as the tourists themselves, can support the diversification of local
businesses and economies by, e.g., providing a complementary source of income beyond traditional
activities, facilitating a broader local supply chain, and inspiring the formation of new businesses that
meet tourists’ needs [47,55].
However, developing a community through CBT also entails risks. First and foremost, community
members, specifically residents, need to show a willingness to be involved in and shape community
development actively by taking over responsibilities and working packages [56]. As Reggers et al.
(2016) [57] demonstrated with direct reference to tourism destinations, the community might be
heavily dependent on seasonality or tourist demands. In addition, many communities lack appropriate
infrastructure, expertise, or financial conditions to execute CBT projects successfully [58]. There is also
great internal risk of conflicts arising from differing interests or perceptions [49]. These barriers may be
redressed with little effort, whereas issues like local and regional infrastructure [59], the competitive
nature of tourism [60], and social, political, and economic structures [61] may restrict community
participation beyond reach. To address the aforementioned obstacles, CBT participants need adequate
skills and education [62] and may consider collaborations with domestic or international tourism
operators to gain access to markets and market-ready products [50]. These risks require further research
on community involvement in general, specifically as they relate to the example of sports tourism.
Current research on sports tourism only roughly applies the bottom-up approach with a high degree
of community involvement [63–66].
Therefore, CBT can manifest in various touristic components, such as demonstrating cultural
traditions and guided tours (e.g., sightseeing or hiking). Sports activities, moreover, offer the potential
for guests to interact with residents and require co-creation.
2.3. Sports Tourism and Its Relevance for Local Development

Scholars have characterized the development of sports as a tourism phenomenon according to
various contemporary trends, including expanding demography, health orientations, demands for
active engagement during holidays, and growing interest in sports events [67]. The different research
strands and classifications of sports tourism were recently framed by the ‘Sport Tourism Cube’ [68].
In that model, Schlemmer et al. (2020) defined sport tourism as “all travel-related activities of single persons
or groups leaving their place of residence with a view to participating in sports events (professional and recreational)
or in activities not related to sports events, to practising sports (physical activity) out of the home range or
personally assisting and supporting athletes in their competition or training activities” [68]. Emphasizing
a stronger spatial context, sports tourism on the supply side incorporates various stakeholders and
fosters local economic development, social-cultural exchange, and interactions [66,69,70]. Outside
of this spectrum, recent studies have discussed the impacts of community sports hubs as a resource
for urban regeneration [71], called for a necessary distinction and integration of sport and event
tourism [68], or emphasized the growing interest in outdoor and adventure sports systems [69,72–75].
Examining sports at the local scale reveals different areas of action, as well as economic, social,
and environmental impacts in their respective areas [76]. By hosting events, sports become monetized and
may result in direct economic benefits [77]. However, studies also outline negative economic consequences
of sports events on the hosting community, such as excessive costs exceeding revenues [78,79]. Apart from
that, value creation resulting from actively practicing sports can be achieved through operating specific
infrastructures or facilities (skiing lifts [80], swimming pools [81], race tracks [82], etc.), the organization
of guided tours (canyoning [83], climbing [84], cycling [85], etc.), and the hospitality of athletes [86].
Sightseeing tours in stadiums or other sports facilities are another way to monetarize passive sport-related
activities apart from hosting events [87]. These examples create a variety of potentials for touristic
valorization based on local peculiarities. Tourism is also considered an expression of identity for a
geographical region or social entity and impacts residents’ lives [42].
Furthermore, sports activities in an area are always linked to the local identity of that area’s
residents. Sport serves as a vehicle for identity formation and consolidation in a region or place [88].
It is an expression of passion and a platform for emotions. People often identify themselves specifically
with a particular sport that is primarily practiced or pursued locally. Local residents practice sports
activities themselves and participate actively or passively in sporting events. This means that each
sport has high value in its host society [89]. The affinity for specific types of sports varies throughout
different regions. This affinity can be based on the degree of popularity, costs to practice, barriers to
entry (e.g., infrastructure, resources, and equipment), or required skills. As a common feature of these
examples, sport has a high degree of influence on certain public areas of life.
When marketing sports—either for local target groups or foreign visitors—certain categories of
sports find their way into marketing. The “Global Association of International Sports Federations
(GAISF)” distinguishes five general categories of sports activities: primarily physical (e.g., ball
games and athletics); primarily mental (e.g., chess); primarily motorized (e.g., car racing); primarily
coordination-based (e.g., billiards), and primarily animal-supported (e.g., horseracing) [90].
The segment of primarily physical activities can be practiced throughout all types of destinations.
For example, mountain regions like the “Zillertal”, a valley within the Tyrolean Alps, intensively
promote outdoor activities such as hiking, mountain biking, and skiing [91]. Coastal destinations like
“Nazaré” in Portugal are famous for their giant waves that attract surfers worldwide [92]. Destinations
specializing in other sports segments include the South Pacific islands (e.g., Cook Islands, American
Samoa, Fiji, etc.). In those places, fishing as a form of animal-supported sport is an important tourism
product and is promoted as such [93–96]. Rural regions like the Ardennes in Belgium and the Eifel in
Germany are famous for motorized sport-related products such as race-weekends and individual test
drives (or authentic racing experiences) on well-known race tracks such as the “Spa Francorchamps”
and “Nürburgring Nordschleife” [97–99].
Aside from the abovementioned classification of sports activities, Mitchell et al. [100] (p. 866)
proposed a different classification (Figure 2). The authors distinguished between the dynamic and
static components of the exercises. Furthermore, a distinction was made regarding the intensity level
(low, medium, or high) of dynamic and static activities. This classification also highlighted sports that
have an increased risk of injury from physical contact with a teammate or opponent or an increased
risk of circulatory problems.
Figure 2. Classification of Sports Activities. * Danger of bodily collision. † Increased risk of syncope.
Source: own illustration after Mitchell et al. (1994) [100].
The classification system provides tourism managers a framework for approaching specific target
groups and evaluating current tourism products and services based on their suitability or directing the
view towards new market potentials. Destinations with good infrastructural connections and a higher
average age of travellers focus more on sector ‘IA’ (e.g., golf resorts), whereas rural tourism regions
with difficult access (e.g., high mountain areas) and higher numbers of young tourists promote sports
activities from sector ‘IC-IIIC’ (e.g., running, cycling, and skiing). However, this strict classification
is blurred due to emerging trends in lifestyles and technologies. With the rise of the e-bike sector,
for instance, the older generation of guests now participates in very dynamic sports activities.
2.4. Deriving a Conceptual Framework for Local Sports Tourism

Summarizing the theoretical discussion of the initially suggested triangle between sports,
community, and tourism, this study enhances current research in sports tourism in pursuit of
sustainably embedded local sports tourism. Figure 3 illustrates this model and the specific research
gaps detected. For example, the relation on the left hand between sports and the community has been
researched frequently with a focus on the impact of sports activities on the local place, without referring
directly to tourism issues. In addition, the interface of sports and tourism for economic development
has been primarily event-driven and seldom embedded in the local place. Finally, CBT at the bottom
of Figure 3 can be seen as a strategic instrument to minimize the leakage of power and revenue
and increase communities’ benefits. We assume that sports tourism provides promising linkages to
CBT and the potential for touristic products. Both elements—CBT and sports—rely heavily on the
participation and involvement of stakeholders. Another success factor for sustainable development in
the context of CBT is the definition of common values within the community.
In this context, sport serves as a common identity consensus that bundles emotions and passions.
Regions often identify strongly with a particular sport, which allows tourism products and services in
this area to be delivered authentically [101]. In this setting, we identified a gap in a way that sports
activities are a resource for offering authentic touristic products [102]. This is reinforced by a lack
of considering active sports as an influencing factor of local identity building [103]. Moreover, we
propose a need to actively shape the sports’ impacts on the host community, especially in developing
countries, in a sustainable way. One approach to meet this endeavor and act as a driver for social
development is community participation [104].
Figure 3. Research Gaps within the sport-tourism-community triangle. Source: own elaboration [14,18,
25,26,29,66,76,77,105–129].
3. Methodology: Systematic Literature Review

The previous considerations have provided a theoretical basis for the underlying interface between
the host community and sports tourism. The underestimated role of the local community in sports
tourism literature requires an overview of the research characteristics at this interface. This can
be achieved through a Systematic Literature Review (SLR). The reasons for conducting an SLR are
twofold: First, there are many research articles on sports tourism, which remain unsorted for the area
of community involvement. Furthermore, to “avoid research biases or missing essential information”
(Concari et al. 2020) [130], the SLR provides a transparent and repeatable method to collect and analyze
a broad base of research papers [131].
Second, the SLR can identify certain aspects within studies (i.e., the challenges of sport tourism in
local development) upon which future research agendas may be based.
Literature reviews often fill an urgently needed research gap between a high quantity of studies
within a topic spectrum and the demand for a condensed and critical discussion within one article [132].
The systematic searching scheme is aligned with this goal. A literature review is a process of collecting,
summarizing, and critically reviewing previous research to answer specific research questions by means
of pre-defined criteria for the selection of documents [133,134]. SLRs differ from traditional narrative
reviews as they generate an objective, replicable, and comprehensible coverage of a pre-defined set
of topics [135]. For this purpose, an SLR uses scientific articles selected according to explicit and
reproducible criteria [136].
So far, SLRs in the field of sport tourism have focused on this field’s combination with sustainability
issues [137–139], mobile technologies [140], and services [141] or engaged with a general knowledge
agenda [142–144]. Multiple studies in tourism research conducting an SLR have followed various
approaches; however, the basic content stays the same [145–152]. This paper uses a four-step approach
(Figure 4). The current SLR aims to identify the existing body of knowledge that discusses and applies
aspects of sports tourism in the context of community development.
Figure 4. Procedure of Systematic Literature Analyses. Source: Own elaboration based on Martin and
Assenov (2012), Welty Peachey et al. (2019), and Thees et al. 2020 [139,153,154].
The theoretical framework provides the basis for determining appropriate keywords for the search
query. Referring to the interfaces between community development and sports tourism, relevant
keyword combinations using the Boolean operator ‘AND’ for the search operations were identified:
• ‘Tourism’ AND ‘Community’ AND ‘Sport’

• ‘Tourism’ AND ‘Development’ AND ‘Sport’
• ‘Destination’ AND ‘Sport’ AND ‘Tourism’.
We then defined a broad spectrum of scientific databases according to their scope of literature in
the humanities to search for promising and diverse publications to obtain a preliminary overview of
the available literature (Table 2).
Table 2. Quantity of hits after first search query without any filter criteria.
Taylor
CAB and Web of SAGE
Database Science-Direct ECONLit SURF MDPI
International Francis Science Journals
Online
Tourism AND
Community 8.862 1.443 28.410 269 1.940 45 638 7.738
AND Sport
Tourism AND
Development 11.662 2.839 38.190 551 7.824 347 843 10.343
AND Sport
Destination
AND Sport 5.708 1.601 14.834 404 3.201 76 399 4026
AND Tourism
Source: Own elaboration; last checked 2 December 2020; overlaps between the platforms are possible.
Due the immense quantity of articles, the systematic query proceeded with strict adherence to the
search criteria and focused only on English-language journal articles from the last 10 years; further
contributions were not considered (e.g., books, chapters, and conference papers). To develop an
in-depth and qualitative SLR, we further applied a filter to relevant keywords in the article titles [143].
This criterion for inclusion refers to the determined field of research definition by the authors of the
corresponding studies and should provide a comprehensible inclusion criterion for this analysis. Based
on these strict search criteria, the SLR was limited step-by-step to a total of 49 articles as the final
sample for further investigation (Table 3).
Table 3. Distribution of Publishing Dates.
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Quantity of publications 3 4 - 6 3 4 6 5 4 8 6
Among the scientific journals represented, broad diversity can be observed. Analysis of the
distribution of relevant journals also shows high heterogeneity. The ‘Journal of Sport and Tourism’
(8) appears the most frequently, followed by ‘Sustainability’ (4) and the ‘Journal of Convention and
Event Tourism’ (3). On closer examination, the journals are rooted in tourism research, sports and
health, environmental studies, or additional humanities. This shows that the understanding of sports
as a development tool is not yet well established. For the in-depth analysis of the selected research
articles, the NVivo software [155] was used to manage and visualize the data using descriptive and
interpretative methods. NVivo is a set of tools that helps researchers analyze complex qualitative
data [110], consisting of thematic clusters, coding, word frequency queries, and cross tables [156–160].
4. Results: Framing the Research Field

The SLR identified a broad spectrum of interrelated issues within multi-dimensional themes,
stressing the interfaces between sport, events, (sustainable) tourism development, and aspects of the
hosting community. We conducted an iterative four-step-approach in NVivo to provide an overview of
the examined research articles’ content. The subsequent presentation of the SLR results follows the
idea of developing insights at different levels that emerge from a broad overview of central terms over
thematic clusters to identify particular characteristics of research articles. The final section displays the
related challenges and benefits.
4.1. Word Cloud: Visualizing the Central Terms

In the first step, a word count of all papers was executed. The word mining tool found and
visualized frequently occurring word stems in the text (Figure 5). In the output visualization, the list
on the right-hand side depicts the most commonly used terms across all research articles. Obvious
terms such as ‘tourism’, ‘sport’, and ‘events’ were some of the most frequently used expressions.
‘Event’ was also included in 39 of the 49 reviewed articles, while the terms ‘development’ and ‘activity’
were present in all articles. The results confirm the event-related focus in the sport tourism literature.
The word count operation revealed interesting aspects that have not yet been explored, such as the
relevance of different ‘impacts’ based on their important dimensional distinctions in assessment, which
were discussed in many articles.
Figure 5. Frequently occurring keywords. Source: own elaboration using NVivo©.
4.2. Cluster Analysis: Thematic Proximity

Building upon the word mining, the second approach took a closer look at the identified themes
and topics via the auto-coding operation. Through computer-assisted coding, short references in the
data set that refer to one code (e.g., ‘social impact’) were detected. The automatic coding approach
lacks in terms of reliability and transparency, which makes manual coding necessary. Therefore, we
carried out a hybrid inductive–deductive categorization of the research articles. By grouping the
code-categories to corresponding umbrella topics, a cluster illustrating the content-related similarities
of terms was produced (Figure 6).
The clustering revealed five main fields of interest in the sampled studies, calculated from the
articles’ coding proximity. Even though Figure 5 suggests clear boundaries between groups of articles,
a high number of articles were located within more than one cluster. Clusters three to five contained
an especially high number of linkages, whereby Sustainability and Sport can be seen as a moderating
aspect between Sport Events and research on the Impact of Sport Tourism. Multi-level Development
Strategies act as a thematic roof and obtain supportive insights from the Sport Demand perspective.
The Sport Demand cluster illuminates the perspective of sport travellers and the perception
of a touristic place [161]. Studies have discussed the relationship between tourist satisfaction and
tourists’ loyalty to a destination [162] or their level of participation in sport tourism and the travel
decision [163,164].
The Development Strategies cluster is located on top due to its role in several other articles.
The main focus fields are management-oriented issues, such as the relationship between the tourism
and sports industries with the resulting coupling mechanism [165] and strategies for sport tourism
enterprises in fostering sustainable tourism development paths [30,166].
Research articles in the field of Sport Events contain, to a considerable extent, discussions on
multi-dimensional impacts and sustainable development models for both the host community [24,26,
114,167–169] and the destination itself [138], which demonstrates a close linkage between the proposed
clusters. Thus, the community participation aspects in the creation, realization, and preservation of
events [92], as well as the promotion of public private partnerships in sport tourism–related businesses,
create socio–economic value for participant stakeholders in a destination [170].
Themes related to current climate change issues, such as environmental protection [94,95], are
bundled within the Sustainability and Sport cluster. Enriched by works on the pro-environment
behavior of outdoor sports tourists [74], eco–friendly green events [171], and knowledge creation
for sustainable tourism products [172,173], this cluster is highly related to the ecological aspects of
sustainability. Socio-cultural and economic issues are frequently discussed within papers featuring a
research focus on tourism supply and demand.
The Impact of Sport Tourism cluster is a bundle of three research streams. Such studies observe the
social interactions and reflect upon the synergies between local and foreign active sport tourism within
a specific destination setting and its socio–economic environment [102,174]. Impact evaluation in the
tourism destination space, in general, plays a crucial role, and is performed based on the perspectives
of sport tourism among local residents [6,102,103] or done to recommend possible reductions in the
negative aspects generated by sports tourism [175]. The impact of sport and tourism in one’s home
town has also been examined using residents’ perceptions [16,115].
Figure 6. Thematic Clusters of Research Articles. Source: Own elaboration using NVivo©.
4.3. Research Features of Articles

The third approach to paper-based features delivers lists of applied theories, concepts, and methods
to address specific research targets (Table 4). According to the collection in Table 4, the reviewed articles
frequently aim to contribute to an impact assessment of events and the derivation of development
strategies, whereas evaluating specific stakeholder groups is of secondary interest. Worth mentioning
are the first studies on the perception of place, which provide a reference for the host community.
The related methodologies show a strong polarization between either qualitative research design, by
conducting interviews or ethnographic methods, or quantitative operations, by using standardized
questionnaires in large–scale surveys. Quantitative elaborations seem especially necessary because the
impact assessment of events acts as a specific instrument in sports tourism. In opposition, qualitative
research focuses on knowledge creation in sustainable development models and the identification of
residents’ perceptions of sports tourism. Theoretical frameworks largely tackle elements from the
social and psychological sciences or concepts of the leisure- and tourism-based literature. In light of
this SLR, the applied concepts of CBT, localism, community participation, and sports–for–development
are essential. A decisive gap appears in the combination and integration of such concepts.
Table 4. Theories, Concepts, Research Aims, and Methods.
Theories & Concepts
• Leisure constraint theory [176]

• Serious leisure [164] • Localism [174]
• Destination involvement [177] • Globalization and glocalization [14]
• Destination marketing [170] • Place identity, attachment, and production [14,74,161,180]
• Travel careers [164] • Coupling development [165]
• Consumer behavior [112] • Social cohesion [24,30,181]
• Sport event models: • Social Exchange Theory [25]
◦ Event travel careers [114,164] • Sport-for-development [181,182]
◦ Event portfolio [31,168,178] • Sustainable development
◦ Active sport event travel career (ASETC) [164] [30,63,74,102,138,166,171–173,175,183,184]
• Community-based tourism [185]
• Active Sport Tourism [114,162,164]
• Community participation and engagement [15,24,63,186]
• Management theories:
• Resident’s perception [25,26,29,127,129,169]
◦ Service-/value chain design, resource–based • Lifestyle entrepreneurs [187]
view [30,179]
• Experiential learning [15]
◦ Sponsoring [171]
◦ Relationship marketing [170]
Aim of the study Methods
• Identification of development mechanism [115,165,176,181]

• Evaluation of the need of theoretical knowledge in the
practical work of tourism decision-makers [179] • Interviews with qualitative data assessment
• Identification of the benefits for stakeholders [127,171] [14,30,127,161,171,176,179,186,187]
• Impact assessment of sport tourism events on hosting • Quantitative interview analysis [113]
destination • Ethnographic approach [14,31,115,168,174,186]
[24–26,63,64,113,114,138,167,169,175,177,184,188,189] • Photo elicitation [161]
• Exploration of demands from active sport tourists [162–164] • Focus groups [24,127]
• Understanding of place from the visitor and resident • Netnography [171]
perspective [14,161,174,180] • Case study [15,170,181]
• Recommendations for development strategies • Literature review [64,102,138,172,175,178,185]
[30,31,102,166,168,170,176,178,183,185–187,190] • Questionnaire survey with quantitative operations [26,29,
• Quantification analysis [112] 63,112,114,129,162,164,166,169,173,177,180,182,184,189]
• Relationship analysis between activities and • Quantitative data analysis based on existing data
individuals [74,174] sets [165,167]
• Knowledge creation [29,172] • Descriptive-analytical study [167,183,190]
• Assessment of strengths and weaknesses [173] • Questionnaire survey of qualitative data [25,74]
• Alignment of theoretical model with practical case [15] • Mixed-method approach [24,163,171]
• Comparative analysis [182]
• Exploration of perceptions [29]
4.4. Challenges and Benefits of Sports Tourism in/for Local Communities

This section aims to identify and systemize statements from the reviewed articles according to
challenges and benefits in sports tourism (Table 5). The contradictions in the potential of sports tourism
are remarkable. Sports tourism is said to be underestimated for its local economic effects, while at the
same time, its multiplier effects are stressed. However, there is a practical problem in communicating
the relevance of sports tourism and its specific requirements. Beyond that, sports tourism seems to fail
in promoting as many effects for the local community as called for by the usage of resources, which
leads to environmental degradation or neglecting residents’ interests.
Table 5. Challenges and Benefits.
Statements Key Issues
• Underestimation of sport tourism as a source of employment [182]

• Balancing employment opportunities for local and foreign
people [127,129,181]
• Fair distribution of positive and negative impacts on local
stakeholders [25,29,127,129]
• Limitations in joint planning and decision-making between
stakeholders [63]
Challenges and Risks • Lack of community involvement [169]
• Deflagration of residents’ participation effects [63]
“[ . . . ] the perceived benefits and drawbacks of sport • Communicating the relationship between impact costs and
tourism are not experienced evenly across small willingness-to-pay for benefits generated on behalf of the
business owners.” [29] (p. 13) residents [184]
• Perceived place-image in relation to the behavior of the wider
“Sports tourism makes sports more expensive for community and host community [138]
residents.” [129] (p. 151) • Preservation of local identities, cultural activities, and demands of
residents [14,129]
“Sport tourism has resulted in traffic congestion, noise • Suitable marketing and promotion strategies [102]
and pollution. [ . . . ] Construction of sport tourist • Setting sustainable-oriented objectives [161]
facilities has destroyed the natural environment.” [25] • Seasonality of specific sports [25]
(p. 127) • Leakages with outside businesses [29]
• Intensive use of natural resources by tourists [175]
“Majority of local residents may find their
participation in event planning irrelevant in • Environmental impacts on local ecosystems and natural protection
influencing sports events tourism development.” [63] areas [63,129]
(p. 11) • Economic costs for public bodies [127,129]
• Polarization of economic benefits to small group of people instead
of multiplier effects [114]
• Infrastructure capacity issues [127,129,169]
• Price increases of local goods and services [129]
• Overcrowding [25,129]
• Security issues (i.e., crime rate, terrorism) [127,129,169]
• Neglecting alternative tourism attractions [25,29]
• Place-identity and place-pride enhancement [25,63,129]

• Superior image of sport as a type of tourism in comparison to other
forms of tourism (i.e., party- or sex-tourism) [129]
• Community engagement and involvement [63]
• Overall increase in quality of life [24]
Opportunities and Benefits
• Local business development [63,102]
“Sports tourism helps keep culture alive and helps • Attracting investments in the community [129]
maintain the ethnic identity of local residents.” [129] • Multiplier-effects and diversification of tourism
(p. 152) offers [29,102,114,129]
• Year-around employment opportunities [25,64,114,182]
“Community support [ . . . ] leads to the success of • Creation of multi-level exchange between individuals and groups
tourism in the destination.” [25] (p. 134) (i.e., traditions, cultures, heritage) [24,25,127,129]
• Enhanced decisiveness for maintaining public
“Sport and tourism can play a major role in the facilities [25,63,129,169,184]
bringing together of communities” [24] (p. 58) • Financial and economic benefits for host community [25,63,129]
• Eco-friendly (nature-based) sports create fewer environmental
impacts and protect the ecosystem [102,114,185]
• Promotion of non-sport-related attractions and activities [25,129]
• Building strong bonds of costumers loyalty [114]
Against this background, several statements on the opportunities of sports tourism address these
challenges by highlighting local business development, the joint interests of residents and tourists,
and non-event-related sports. The latter especially opposes expensive and temporary mega-events with
high infrastructural investments and calls for alternative sports activities that suit local sustainability.
In summary, the SLR illustrates the linkage between sports tourism and the local community
through central terms (Section 4.1), thematic clusters (Section 4.2), research features (Section 4.3),
and benefits and challenges (Section 4.4). In this setting, the SLR reveals and collects the few researched
approaches related to the communities’ roles. With these results, the SLR also contributes to highlighting
the elements that remain under-researched, such as qualitative research, the preservation of identity,
and guests–hosts interactions, along with sports tourism.
5. Discussion: The Community as a Host in Sports Tourism

Against the background of the challenges and benefits of sports tourism as an instrument for
community development, it is important to focus on the local community and the role of sustainable
development. Beyond the prevalence of research on sports events, we assume that community
involvement and sustainability are valid principles for various sports tourism configurations. Figure 7
illustrates the expansion of the theoretical framework. The bottom of the triangle in Figure 7 refers to the
well-researched approach of utilizing the effects of tourism by focusing on the communities’ needs and
empowering the community in its tourism development. In this way, the results of the SLR highlight
the relevance of sports tourism with its various economic benefits but fail to discuss the role of the
local community as a supporter, as a carrier of identity, and as a recipient of unintentional externalities.
Based on the SLR, we further discuss the concrete support and engagement of the locals (Section 5.2).
By recognizing existing practices in sports and established products, such as events or related
infrastructures, it becomes a task of destination development to transfer these factors into touristic
products (Section 5.1). Although this paper focusses on CBT, well-established concepts of destination
development [102] remain valid, such as network governance [191], regional development [192],
collaborative economy [193], and competitiveness [194], and need to be implemented according to the
different development statuses of destinations. Sports Tourism needs to be broadened from its original
definition (Section 2.3), emphasizing the categorization of event-relatedness, the type of physical
involvement, the level of sport engagement, and a factor for economic value creation, in pursuit of
a bottom-up process that increases the level of residents’ involvement and meets the requirements
of CBT. This could further promote the mutual relationship between the host community and its
sports-identity and touristic products.
Figure 7. Addressing the interfaces within the sports-community-tourism triangle. Source:

Own elaboration.
5.1. Approaching Identity-Based Product Development

Reflecting on the recent discourse of sports events, researchers identified various positive and
negative effects on host communities’ economic, social, and environmental dimensions [26,138].
However, calls have been made to critically emphasize increasing environmental awareness among
marketers, tourists, and local residents [74]. A critical and fruitful dispute with sports tourism is
necessary through sustainability challenges, which includes setting standards for [94], monitoring, and
evaluating [81] the impacts of events and sports infrastructure. Such an assessment should follow the
ideas of sustainable development or, more specifically, community development concerning long-term
effects, as “[ . . . ] sport has become a phenomenon of large dimensions and it is an important resource for the
development of a local context” [102] (p. 44).
Moreover, sports tourism’s sustainability relies on the local degree of development, the number of
tourists, the community size, and touristic development [138]. Popular and well-developed destinations
might already be equipped with several service providers that also offer the necessary quality of
transport, accommodations, leisure, or gastronomy infrastructure to host sports tourists [138,167].
Building upon that concept, the degree of the necessary infrastructure for particular sports activities
significantly determine the environmental impact of those activities [102]. Here, the literature especially
stresses the positive impact of small-scale events on economic and social sustainability by utilizing direct
and indirect impacts on the community [114]. Even activities without comprehensive infrastructure
requirements, such as running, can positively serve local economies [195] and benefit from intact
natural surroundings [196].
Here, our research paper aims to summarize the potential benefits in community-based tourism
by recognizing the need for a local discussion of sports tourism (RQ 1). As such, we perceive sports as a
cultural phenomenon that relies on a kind of sports identity that, in turn, manifests in regional-specific
sports activities [25] (Section 2.3).
A success factor of sports tourism is undoubtedly recognizing the local cultural peculiarities [161]
and residents’ needs [35], which reflects a broad stakeholder approach (Section 5.2) and the prerequisites
of authentic tourist experiences [43]. Following a specific resource endowment in identity, knowledge,
and infrastructure, the community can create touristic products. This type of value-based product
development [197] can serve as the starting point for the sustainable use of these local features.
Nevertheless, touristic product development also includes a market-based view to recognize tourists’
needs and to market the respective products. This combination of resource- and market-based views
involves balancing residents’ quality of life and tourists’ quality of experience (Section 2.1). For the
touristic product, this means transferring the local sports identity into the tourism product: “The dynamic
created by the experience of physical practice matched with the enjoyment of tourism services within the territory
[ . . . ] acts as a catalyst for local development and tourism” [102] (p. 54). As an outcome, residents will be
more likely to support tourism development when it is based on their specific values and activities.
Thus, efforts in tourism infrastructure should also facilitate the locals’ quality of life [197,198]. In this
respective field, sports activities could function as a transfer medium of local identity in pursuit of a
touristic experience.
In summary, we can now answer RQ 1 on utilizing the potential of identity-based sports in the
sense of CBT. Sport-related activities rooted in the local identity have the potential to deliver authentic
experiences and products. Destination management involves seeking a good balance between locals
and guests. As such, sports tourism offers provide a platform for social and cultural exchange.
5.2. Local Engagement as a Success Factor

In community-based tourism, the question arises: How can we manage tourism development
through the involvement and participation of locals (Section 2.2)? Typically, consensus, trust, and
job-sharing are the main principles of CBT. An accompanying factor is general local support, which has
been widely neglected by past researchers. This applies to residents’ engagement in tourism services
(as hosts, guides, or sports enthusiasts) but also to the subsequent discussions on managing CBT.
Scholars agree that CBT [25,37,45], as well as local efforts on sports tourism, rely on the broad
management of stakeholders [185], who already have mutual dependency on tourism destinations [129].
Besides the demand side (foreign visitors, tourists, travelers [181,182], and event spectators [129]),
important sports tourism stakeholders in the local community include:
• Tourism planners and developers [29,63]
• Event organizers and managers [24,29,63,161,169]
• Sportspeople and athletes [129,181]
• Tourism organization managers and marketers [102,169,182]
• Local authorities, politicians, and bodies [25,63,129,181]

• (Small-) business owners and entrepreneurs [29,187]
• Accommodation suppliers [29]
• Local residents and the population [25,29,63,129,138,161,169]
Sports tourism impacts are undoubtedly viewed differently by various stakeholders [29], but special
attention should be given to the residents as “one of the main interest groups linked to the development
of tourism in a given locality” [129] (p. 153). Indeed, residents are vital because locals are exposed to
tourism’s long-term effects. In particular, the effects of sport tourism events have been frequently
researched. Resident perceptions of social impacts resulting from hosting large-scale sport tourism
events have also become important factors for obtaining community-wide event support [138,169].
Nevertheless, calls have been made to plan and implement events carefully [138] and to actively
develop sustainability strategies [161].
A broad set of strategies exists to foster the various sustainability dimensions of sports tourism [30].
Thus, the local community needs to understand sustainable tourism with special consideration of
capacity building [185] in touristic products, standards, and processes [30]. The involvement of
stakeholders is a success criterion for sports tourism in general but especially for the sustainable
development and generation of benefits for the local community. To counteract an uneven division of
impacts [25,48,185], the participation of residents and visitors is required [161,172]. This is accompanied
by the concepts of community participation, involvement, ownership, and empowerment [24,63,138]:
“community participation plays an important role in the development of sustainable tourism, especially
community-based tourism.” [63] (p. 5). Moreover, local engagement is bound to economic success, as
the latter depends on the support and involvement of the local community [129]. Shared interests
between visitors and residents are also analyzed against the background of a joint place attachment,
which positively influences sustainability [161]. In addition, bridging the interests of residents and
visitors can provide the basis for a positive welcoming culture [129]. There are a number of established
tools for the joint development of tourism strategies, covering wide fields of communication, e.g.,
round tables, consultations, public meetings, field trips, seminars, forums, open spaces, and concrete
agreements [56,154].
However, we argue that sustainable development and CBT do not exclude a focal organization
in the network, such as a Destination Management Organization (DMO) or a kind of governance
arrangement [129,185]. The presence of a DMO would also address the need for touristic promotion [199]
and marketing strategies [115,127], as well as include sports tourism in the overall destination development
strategy [127]. To further increase sustainability, the frequent monitoring of sports effects—especially
events—could help adapt strategies and highlight the outputs of sports tourism [25,63]. This could
support the positive perception of sport impacts among residents [63]. A DMO could further promote
product development in sports through cooperation with non-tourism-related sectors [129]. The latter
mainly addresses the potential of local value creation and diversification [200]. Local value chains meet
the ideas of CBT to minimize leakages of power and capital (Section 2.2). In these terms, it is essential that
tourism management remains under local control [46–48] and meets the prerequisites of trust, openness,
and respect between individuals and groups [24].
Answering RQ2 on the role of the local community in developing sports tourism, local support and
the engagement of residents are critical success factors. The visible transfer of local sports enthusiasm
in the processes of co-creation with guests can create authentic experiences. The local community is
a diverse set of stakeholders in which sports represents a field of potential business opportunities
for everyone. Moreover, this community-based approach requires cooperation, trust, and a mutual
understanding of place and identity.
6. Conclusions: Recommendations for Future Research

To fulfil this study’s aims, based on the community-based tourism approach, a Systematic
Literature Review was conducted to identify characteristics in the interface between community
development and sports tourism within the sample of research articles. The SLR here allowed the
systematic review of sports tourism and to support an emerging field. In summary, these insights from
the theory and SLR highlight the increasingly community-based and sustainable development of sport
tourism products.
In this way, we contribute to a broader understanding of the relevance of sports for the local
community and as a source of an authentic experience for tourists. We identified an existing research
gap within the triangle of sports, tourism and the community (Figures 3 and 7). We specifically address
this gap, by emphasizing the importance of local engagement as a factor for success in the sustainable
and long-term local development of space. Hence, we approach an identity-based development of
new touristic products that are supported by sports activities to broaden the original definition of
sports tourism (Section 2.3). On this basis, we further call to intensify research on, along with the
practical recognition of, the host community and their specific sports identity. In this light, the previous
discussion answered the two research questions. Moreover, this study developed various research
recommendations related to the host community’s role in sports tourism. These recommendations can
be summarized by the following four criteria:
1. Multidisciplinarity: The analysis of sports tourism should be expanded from an event focus
towards sustainability issues and the local community. This also requires bridging development
approaches, such as CBT, with the features of sports. The cultural theories and theories
around “Sport-for-Development” offer a suitable perspective as they consider sports to “facilitate
personal development and social change by embracing non-traditional sport management practices
through an interdisciplinary framework, blending sport with cultural enrichment” [201] (p. 313).
The sport-for-development stream discusses issues regarding the positive impacts on society
and the economy from sports activities. What lacks in the discussions of SFD are tourism-based
perspectives and development opportunities. This provides a legitimate starting point for future
analyses to penetrate the gap between SFD aspects and CBT potentials.
2. The diversity of sports: Research should address different sports activities and their impacts on
the local community. This also includes small-scale sports events and non-event-related activities,
especially those that are practiced by locals. These potentially unpopular activities can be of great
interest, as they are deeply rooted in communities’ identities. Thus, these sports open space for
dealing with tourism.
3. Sustainability-orientation: There is increasing awareness of the importance of sustainability in
sports tourism. Research in this field is, nevertheless, still limited and is mostly confined to
specific areas such as mega-events [30].
4. Methods should concentrate on in-depth case studies to illustrate local challenges and benefits.
The assessment of impacts on local areas is also of relevance here.
The above research recommendations apply to community-based tourism destinations, which
also limits this study. Nevertheless, community-based tourism follows the zeitgeist of independent,
sustainable, and endogenous development. Analysis of additional megatrends could help prepare
destinations for the future expansion of sports activities. However, due to the current restrictions
caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, other types of physical activities with less contact, such as hiking,
are requested. Megatrends like health aspirations, nature awareness, and regionalism are well-adapted
to these new conditions. Consequently, the borders between the interests of the host community and
the motivations of tourists are becoming further blurred.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, V.H. and H.T.; methodology, V.H. and H.T.; software, V.H.; validation,
V.H., H.T., and J.P.; formal analysis, V.H. and H.T.; investigation, V.H. and H.T.; resources, V.H., H.T., and J.P.; data
curation, V.H.; writing—original draft preparation, V.H., H.T., and J.P.; writing—review and editing, V.H., H.T.,
and J.P.; visualization, V.H.; supervision, V.H.; project administration, V.H.; funding acquisition, V.H. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the funding program
Open Access Publishing.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to
publish the results.
References
1. United Nations. The Impact of COVID-19 on Sport, Physical Activity and Well-Being and Its Effects on Social
Development|DISD. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/2020/05/covid-19-sport/
(accessed on 21 July 2020).
2. Giove, G. Studie Bestätigt: Laufboom durch Corona. Achilles Running, 3 June 2020. Available online:
https://www.achilles-running.de/welttag-des-laufens-studie-zeigt-laufboom-durch-corona/ (accessed on 31
October 2020).
3. Catuogno, C. Im Park Statt in New York. Süddeutsche Zeitung, 25 June 2020. Available online: https:
//www.sueddeutsche.de/sport/kommentar-im-park-statt-in-new-york-1.4948077 (accessed on 31 October
2020).
4. Ryan, T.J. Is The COVID-19 Running Boom Sustainable? SGB Media Online, 27 October 2020. Available
online: https://sgbonline.com/is-the-covid-19-running-boom-sustainable/ (accessed on 31 October 2020).
5. Vetter, C. Gescheiterte Olympia-Bewerbung von Tirol: Winterspiele Machen Keinen Sinn Mehr!
Tagesspiegel. Available online: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/sport/gescheiterte-olympia-bewerbung-von-
tirol-winterspiele-machen-keinen-sinn-mehr/20459798.html (accessed on 30 October 2020).
6. Szymanski, M.; Frank, M. Hilfe für die “Bayerischen Freunde”. Süddeutsche Zeitung, 29 July 2010. Available
online: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/olympia-bewerbung-hilfe-fuer-die-bayerischen-freunde-1.
979602 (accessed on 30 October 2020).
7. Hecker, A. Olympia Vereist. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 16 October 2017. Available online: https:
//www.faz.net/aktuell/sport/sportpolitik/innsbruck-sagt-nein-olympia-vereist-15249244.html (accessed on
30 October 2020).
8. Skinner, J.; Woolcock, G.; Milroy, A. SDP and social capital. In Routledge Handbook of Sport for Development
and Peace; Collison, H., Darnell, S.C., Giulianotti, R., Howe, P.D., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2019;
pp. 296–307, ISBN 9781315455174.
9. Guest, A.M. SDP and sport psychology. In Routledge Handbook of Sport for Development and Peace; Collison, H.,
Darnell, S.C., Giulianotti, R., Howe, P.D., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2019; pp. 230–240, ISBN
9781315455174.
10. Gibson, H.J.; Kaplanidou, K.; Kang, S.J. Small-scale event sport tourism: A case study in sustainable tourism.
Sport Manag. Rev. 2012, 15, 160–170. [CrossRef]
11. Halpenny, E.A.; Kulczycki, C.; Moghimehfar, F. Factors effecting destination and event loyalty: Examining
the sustainability of a recurrent small-scale running event at Banff National Park. J. Sport Tour. 2016, 20,
233–262. [CrossRef]
12. Kaplanidou, K.; Gibson, H.J. Predicting Behavioral Intentions of Active Event Sport Tourists: The Case of a
Small-scale Recurring Sports Event. J. Sport Tour. 2010, 15, 163–179. [CrossRef]
13. Pechlaner, H.; Nordhorn, C.; Poppe, X. Being a guest—Perspectives of an extended hospitality approach.
Int. J. Cult. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2016, 10, 424–439. [CrossRef]
14. Evans, D.; Norcliffe, G. Local identities in a global game: The social production of football space in Liverpool.
J. Sport Tour. 2016, 20, 217–232. [CrossRef]
15. Jinkins, L.; Cecil, A.K. A Shift in Community Engagement Models: A Case Study of Indiana University–Purdue
University Indianapolis and the Indianapolis Business Community. J. Conv. Event Tour. 2015, 16, 159–174.
[CrossRef]
16. Fürtjes, O. Football and its continuity as a classless mass phenomenon in Germany and England: Rethinking
the bourgeoisification of football crowds. Soccer Soc. 2014, 17, 588–609. [CrossRef]
17. Watson, S.D. Everyday nationalism and international hockey: Contesting Canadian national identity.
Nations Natl. 2016, 23, 289–308. [CrossRef]
18. Horak, R.; Spitaler, G. Sport Space and National Identity. Am. Behav. Sci. 2003, 46, 1506–1518. [CrossRef]
19. The Boston Globe. Getting up to Speed in the Kenyan Village of Iten. Available online: https://www.boston.
com/travel/travel/2017/12/21/getting-up-to-speed-in-the-kenyan-village-of-iten (accessed on 31 October
2020).
20. Perić, M.; Dragičević, D.; Škorić, S. Determinants of active sport event tourists’ expenditure—The case of
mountain bikers and trail runners. J. Sport Tour. 2019, 23, 19–39. [CrossRef]
21. High Altitude Training Centre. About HATC. Available online: https://hatc-iten.com/about/ (accessed on 31
October 2020).
22. United Nations World Tourism Organization. 2017 Is the International Year of Sustainable Tourism
for Development. Available online: https://www.unwto.org/archive/global/press-release/2017-01-03/2017-
international-year-sustainable-tourism-development (accessed on 21 July 2020).
23. Sustainable Development Goals—SDGs—The United Nations. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals
(accessed on 20 January 2020).
24. Jamieson, N. Sport Tourism Events as Community Builders—How Social Capital Helps the “Locals” Cope.
J. Conv. Event Tour. 2014, 15, 57–68. [CrossRef]
25. Hritz, N.; Ross, C. The Perceived Impacts of Sport Tourism: An Urban Host Community Perspective.
J. Sport Manag. 2010, 24, 119–138. [CrossRef]
26. Monterrubio, J.C.; Ramírez, O.; Ortiz, J.C. Host community attitudes towards sport tourism events: Social
impacts of the 2011 Pan American Games. E Rev. Tour. Res. 2011, 9, 33–46.
27. Gibson, H. Sport Tourism: Concepts and Theories. An Introduction. Sport Soc. 2006, 8, 133–141. [CrossRef]
28. Trendafilova, S.; Ziakas, V.; Sparvero, E. Linking corporate social responsibility in sport with community
development: An added source of community value. Sport Soc. 2016, 20, 938–956. [CrossRef]
29. Hritz, N.; Cecil, A. Small business owner’s perception of the value and impacts of sport tourism on a
destination. J. Conv. Event Tour. 2019, 20, 224–240. [CrossRef]
30. Carneiro, M.J.; Breda, Z.; Cordeiro, C. Sports tourism development and destination sustainability: The case
of the coastal area of the Aveiro region, Portugal. J. Sport Tour. 2016, 20, 305–334. [CrossRef]
31. Ziakas, V.; Costa, C.A. ‘Between Theatre and Sport’ in a Rural Event: Evolving Unity and Community
Development from the Inside-Out. J. Sport Tour. 2010, 15, 7–26. [CrossRef]
32. Walton, J.K.; Wood, J. (Eds.) The Making of a Cultural Landscape: The Englisch Lake District as Tourist Destination,
1750–2010; First iussed in paperback; Ashgate Publishing: Farnham, UK, 2016; ISBN 9781138246256.
33. Billings, J.R. Community development: A critical review of approaches to evaluation. J. Adv. Nurs. 2000, 31,
34. Matarrita-Cascante, D.; Brennan, M.A. Conceptualizing community development in the twenty-first century.
Community Dev. 2012, 43, 293–305. [CrossRef]
35. Green, J.J. Community Development and Social Development. Res. Soc. Work. Pract. 2016, 26, 605–608.
[CrossRef]
36. Giampiccoli, A.; Saayman, M. A Conceptualisation of Alternative Forms of Tourism in Relation to Community
Development. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 2014, 1, 5. [CrossRef]
37. Frisch, M.; Servon, L.J. CDCs and the Changing Context for Urban Community Development: A Review of
the Field and the Environment. Community Dev. 2009, 37, 88–108. [CrossRef]
38. Rainey, D.V.; Robinson, K.L.; Allen, I.; Christy, R.D. Essential Forms of Capital for Sustainable Community
Development. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2003, 85, 708–715. [CrossRef]
39. Flagestad, A.; Hope, C.A. Strategic success in winter sports destinations: A sustainable value creation
perspective. Tour. Manag. 2001, 22, 445–461. [CrossRef]
40. Volgger, M.; Pechlaner, H.; Pichler, S. The practice of destination governance: A comparative analysis of key
dimensions and underlying concepts. J. Tour. Herit. Serv. Mark. 2017, 3, 18–84.
41. Kagermeier, A.; Amzil, L.; Elfasskaoui, B. The transition of governance approaches to rural tourism in
Southern Morocco. Eur. J. Tour. Res. 2018, 23, 40–62.
42. Herntrei, M. Wettbewerbsfähigkeit von Tourismusdestinationen. Bürgerbeteiligung als Erfolgsfaktor? Springer
Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2014.
43. Fiorello, A.; Bo, D. Community-Based Ecotourism to Meet the New Tourist’s Expectations: An Exploratory
Study. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2012, 21, 758–778. [CrossRef]
44. Eckert, C.; Pechlaner, H. Alternative Product Development as Strategy towards Sustainability in Tourism:
The Case of Lanzarote. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3588. [CrossRef]
45. Naku, D.W.C.; Afrane, S. Local Community Development and the Participatory Planning Approach:
A Review of Theory and Practice. Curr. Res. J. Soc. Sci. 2013, 5, 185–191. [CrossRef]
46. Snyder, K.A.; Sulle, E.B. Tourism in Maasai communities: A chance to improve livelihoods? J. Sustain. Tour.
2011, 19, 935–951. [CrossRef]
47. Holladay, P.J.; Powell, R.B. Resident perceptions of social–ecological resilience and the sustainability of
community-based tourism development in the Commonwealth of Dominica. J. Sustain. Tour. 2013, 21,
1188–1211. [CrossRef]
48. Giampiccoli, A.; Saayman, M.; Jugmohan, S. Are ‘Albergo Diffuso’ and community-based tourism the
answers to community development in South Africa? Dev. S. Afr. 2016, 33, 548–561. [CrossRef]
49. Okazaki, E. A Community-Based Tourism Model: Its Conception and Use. J. Sustain. Tour. 2008, 16, 511–529.
[CrossRef]
50. Dodds, R.; Ali, A.; Galaski, K. Mobilizing knowledge: Determining key elements for success and pitfalls in
developing community-based tourism. Curr. Issues Tour. 2016, 21, 1547–1568. [CrossRef]
51. Lee, T.H.; Jan, F.-H. Can community-based tourism contribute to sustainable development? Evidence from
residents’ perceptions of the sustainability. Tour. Manag. 2019, 70, 368–380. [CrossRef]
52. Saarinen, J. Local tourism awareness: Community views in Katutura and King Nehale Conservancy, Namibia.
Dev. S. Afr. 2010, 27, 713–724. [CrossRef]
53. Scheyvens, R. Tourism for Development: Empowering Communities; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA,
2002.
54. Snyman, S.L. The role of tourism employment in poverty reduction and community perceptions of
conservation and tourism in southern Africa. J. Sustain. Tour. 2012, 20, 395–416. [CrossRef]
55. Zapata, M.J.; Hall, C.M.; Lindo, P.; Vanderschaeghe, M. Can community-based tourism contribute to
development and poverty alleviation? Lessons from Nicaragua. Curr. Issues Tour. 2011, 14, 725–749.
[CrossRef]
56. Kantsperger, M.; Thees, H.; Eckert, C. Local Participation in Tourism Development—Roles of Non-Tourism
Related Residents of the Alpine Destination Bad Reichenhall. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6947. [CrossRef]
57. Reggers, A.; Grabowski, S.; Wearing, S.; Chatterton, P.; Schweinsberg, S. Exploring outcomes of
community-based tourism on the Kokoda Track, Papua New Guinea: A longitudinal study of Participatory
Rural Appraisal techniques. J. Sustain. Tour. 2016, 24, 1139–1155. [CrossRef]
58. Rodrigues, C.B.; Prideaux, B. A management model to assist local communities developing community-based
tourism ventures: A case study from the Brazilian Amazon. J. Ecotour. 2017, 17, 1–19. [CrossRef]
59. Rocharungsat, P. Community-based tourism in Asia. In Building Community Capacity for Tourism Development;
CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2009; pp. 60–74. [CrossRef]
60. Kiss, A. Is community-based ecotourism a good use of biodiversity conservation funds? Trends Ecol. Evol.
2004, 19, 232–237. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
61. Santana, G. An overview of contemporary tourism development in Brazil. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag.
2000, 12, 424–430. [CrossRef]
62. Sebele, L.S. Community-based tourism ventures, benefits and challenges: Khama Rhino Sanctuary Trust,
Central District, Botswana. Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 136–146. [CrossRef]
63. Boonsiritomachai, W.; Phonthanukitithaworn, C. Residents’ Support for Sports Events Tourism Development
in Beach City: The Role of Community’s Participation and Tourism Impacts. SAGE Open 2019, 9. [CrossRef]
64. Giampiccoli, A.; Lee, S.; Nauright, J. Destination South Africa: Comparing global sports mega-events and
recurring localised sports events in South Africa for tourism and economic development. Curr. Issues Tour.
2013, 18, 229–248. [CrossRef]
65. Nicholson, M.; Brown, K.; Hoye, R. Sport, community involvement and social support. Sport Soc. 2013, 17,
6–22. [CrossRef]
66. Chang, M.-X.; Choong, Y.-O.; Ng, L.-P. Local residents’ support for sport tourism development: The moderating
effect of tourism dependency. J. Sport Tour. 2020, 24, 215–234. [CrossRef]
67. Hinch, T.; Higham, J.E.S. Sport Tourism Development, 2nd ed.; Channel View Publications: Bristol, UK, 2011;
ISBN 9781845411954.
68. Schlemmer, P.; Barth, M.; Schnitzer, M. Research note sport tourism versus event tourism: Considerations on
a necessary distinction and integration. J. Conv. Event Tour. 2020, 21, 91–99. [CrossRef]
69. Philippe, M. Social and Associative Sports Tourism in France: The Glénans and the National Union of
Outdoor Sports Centres (UCPA). Int. J. Hist. Sport 2020, 37, 433–450. [CrossRef]
70. Rejón-Guardia, F.; Alemany-Hormaeche, M.; García-Sastre, M.A. Ibiza dances to the rhythm of pedals:
The motivations of mountain biking tourists competing in sporting events. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2020, 36,
100750. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
71. Davies, L. A wider role for sport: Community sports hubs and urban regeneration. Sport Soc. 2016, 19,
1537–1555. [CrossRef]
72. Langenbach, M.; Tuppen, J. The concept of localised outdoor sports tourist systems: Its application to
Ardèche in south-east France. J. Sport Tour. 2017, 21, 263–286. [CrossRef]
73. Godtman Kling, K.; Fredman, P.; Wall-Reinius, S. Trails for tourism and outdoor recreation: A systematic
literature review. Tour. Int. Interdiscip. J. 2017, 65, 488–508.
74. Uesugi, A.; Kudo, Y. The relationship between outdoor sport participants’ place attachment and
pro-environment behaviour in natural areas of Japan for developing sustainable outdoor sport tourism.
Eur. J. Sport Soc. 2020, 17, 162–179. [CrossRef]
75. Perić, M.; Vitezić, V.; Badurina, J. Ðurkin Business models for active outdoor sport event tourism experiences.
Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2019, 32, 100561. [CrossRef]
76. Daniels, M.J. Central place theory and sport tourism impacts. Ann. Tour. Res. 2007, 34, 332–347. [CrossRef]
77. Burgan, B.; Mules, T. Economic impact of sporting events. Ann. Tour. Res. 1992, 19, 700–710. [CrossRef]
78. Mules, T.; Dwyer, L. Public Sector Support for Sport Tourism Events: The Role of Cost-benefit Analysis.
Sport Soc. 2005, 8, 338–355. [CrossRef]
79. Barclay, J. Predicting the Costs and Benefits of Mega-Sporting Events: Misjudgement of Olympic Proportions?
Econ. Aff. 2009, 29, 62–66. [CrossRef]
80. SkiWelt. Austria’s Greatest Mountain Experience: Summer Lift Operations Wilder Kaiser—Brixental.
Available online: https://www.skiwelt.at/en/unique-summer-experiences-in-tyrol.html (accessed on 31
October 2020).
81. Stadtwerke München GmbH. Olympia-Schwimmhalle|Hallenbad, Sauna, Fitness. Available online: https:
//www.swm.de/baeder/schwimmen-sauna/olympia-schwimmhalle (accessed on 31 October 2020).
82. Nuerburgring.de. Opening Hours. Available online: https://www.nuerburgring.de/en/fans-info/info/
opening-hours.html (accessed on 31 October 2020).
83. rafting-canyoning.de. Canyoning in Tyrol. Available online: https://www.rafting-canyoning.de/en/
canyoning.htm (accessed on 31 October 2020).
84. Bayerischer Wald. Kletterfelsen und -Hallen. Available online: https://www.bayerischer-wald.de/
Urlaubsthemen/Aktiv-Abenteuer/Hoehen-Erlebnis/Kletterfelsen-und-hallen (accessed on 31 October 2020).
85. Eurobike. Guided Cycle Tours: Group Tour with Tour Guide. Available online: https://www.eurobike.at/en/
cycling-holidays/tour-type/guided-cycle-tours (accessed on 31 October 2020).
86. Davies, L.E. Using sports infrastructure to deliver economic and social change: Lessons for London beyond
2012. Local Econ. 2011, 26, 227–231. [CrossRef]
87. Leask, A.; Digance, J. Exploiting Unused Capacity. J. Conv. Exhib. Manag. 2002, 3, 17–35. [CrossRef]
88. MacClancy, J. Sport, Identity, and Ethnicity; Bloomsbury Publishing PLC: New York, NY, USA, 1996.
89. Lüschen, G. The Interdependence of Sport and Culture. Int. Rev. Sport Sociol. 1967, 2, 127–141. [CrossRef]
90. World Lacrosse. GAISF Definition of Sport. Available online: https://worldlacrosse.sport/about-world-
lacrosse/gaisf/ (accessed on 29 October 2020).
91. Zillertal Tourismus GmbH. Activities in Zillertal in Tirol. Available online: https://en.zillertal.at/en/tips.html
(accessed on 29 October 2020).
92. Turismo de Portugal. Nazaré. Available online: https://www.visitportugal.com/en/node/73770 (accessed on
29 October 2020).
93. Pacific Tourism Organisation. Fishing Tourism in Pacific Island Countries. Available online: http://
southpacificspecialist.org/fishing-tourism-in-pacific-island-countries/ (accessed on 29 October 2020).
94. Cook Island Tourism Corporation. Fishing|Cook Islands. Available online: https://cookislands.travel/
experiences/water/fishing (accessed on 29 October 2020).
95. American-Samoa. Fisheries|American-Samoa. Available online: https://www.americansamoa.gov/things-to-
do-in-american-samoa (accessed on 29 October 2020).
96. Namotu Island Fiji. Fishing in Fiji: The Best Fishing Spots and Types of Fish You Can Catch!|Namotu Island
Fiji. Available online: https://www.namotuislandfiji.com/blog/fishing-in-fiji-the-best-fishing-spots-and-
types-of-fish-you-can-catch/ (accessed on 29 October 2020).
97. Eifel Tourismus GmbH. Top 10 Ausflugsziele Eifel. Available online: https://www.eifel.info/ausflugsziele/
top-10-ausflugsziele-eifel (accessed on 29 October 2020).
98. Eventimpresents GmbH & Co., KG. Rock am Ring 2021. Available online: https://www.rock-am-ring.com/
(accessed on 29 October 2020).
99. Tourismus in den Ardennen. Découvrir Die Rennstrecke von Spa-Francorchamps—Tourismus in den
Ardennen. Available online: https://www.visitardenne.com/de/das-beste-der-ardennen/ardenner-highlights/
die-rennstrecke-von-spa-francorchamps (accessed on 29 October 2020).
100. Mitchell, J.H.; Haskell, W.L.; Raven, P.B. Classification of sports. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1994, 24, 864–866.
[CrossRef]
101. Weed, M. Sports Tourism Theory and Method—Concepts, Issues and Epistemologies. Eur. Sport Manag. Q.
2005, 5, 229–242. [CrossRef]
102. Radicchi, E. Tourism and Sport: Strategic Synergies to Enhance the Sustainable Development of a Local
Context. Phys. Cult. Sport. Stud. Res. 2013, 57, 44–57. [CrossRef]
103. Tonts, M.; Atherley, K. Competitive sport and the construction of place identity in rural Australia. Sport Soc.
2010, 13, 381–398. [CrossRef]
104. Vermeulen, J.; Verweel, P. Participation in sport: Bonding and bridging as identity work. Sport Soc. 2009, 12,
1206–1219. [CrossRef]
105. Cubizolles, S. Marketing Identity and Place: The Case of the Stellenbosch Kayamandi Economic Corridor
Before the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. J. Sport Tour. 2011, 16, 33–53. [CrossRef]
106. Ramshaw, G.; Hinch, T. Place Identity and Sport Tourism: The Case of the Heritage Classic Ice Hockey Event.
Curr. Issues Tour. 2006, 9, 399–418. [CrossRef]
107. Moore, R.; Richardson, M.; Corkill, C. Identity in the “Road Racing Capital of the World”: Heritage,
geography and contested spaces. J. Heritage Tour. 2014, 9, 228–245. [CrossRef]
108. Green, B.C.; Jones, I. Serious Leisure, Social Identity and Sport Tourism. Sport Soc. 2006, 8, 164–181. [CrossRef]
109. Higham, J.; Hinch, T. Sport and Tourism. Sport Tour. 2010, 1. [CrossRef]
110. Wise, N. Transcending imaginations through football participation and narratives of the other: Haitian
national identity in the Dominican Republic. J. Sport Tour. 2011, 16, 259–275. [CrossRef]
111. Snelgrove, R.; Taks, M.; Chalip, L.; Green, B.C. How Visitors and Locals at a Sport Event Differ in Motives
and Identity. J. Sport Tour. 2008, 13, 165–180. [CrossRef]
112. Perna, F.; Custódio, M.J.; Oliveira, V. Local Communities and Sport Activities Expenditures and Image:
Residents’ Role in Sustainable Tourism and Recreation. Eur. J. Tour. Hosp. Recreat. 2019, 9, 49–59. [CrossRef]
113. Ahmadi, H.; Moeenfard, M.R.; Tabaeeban, S.A. The impacts of sport tourism development in Kish Island.
J. Am. Sci. 2013, 9, 23–29.
114. Duglio, S.; Beltramo, R. Estimating the Economic Impacts of a Small-Scale Sport Tourism Event: The Case of
the Italo-Swiss Mountain Trail CollonTrek. Sustainability 2017, 9, 343. [CrossRef]
115. Mercea, T.I. Strategies for tourism development in Arges through sports and recreational activities. In Annals
of “Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati-Fascicle XV: Physical Education and Sport Management; Galati University
Press: Galati, Romania, 2014; pp. 22–24.
116. Allan, G.; Dunlop, S.; Swales, J.K. The Economic Impact of Regular Season Sporting Competitions:
The Glasgow Old Firm Football Spectators as Sports Tourists. J. Sport Tour. 2007, 12, 63–97. [CrossRef]
117. Gibson, H.; McIntyre, S.; Mackay, S.; Riddington, G. The Economic Impact of Sports, Sporting Events, and
Sports Tourism in the U.K. The DREAM™ Model. Eur. Sport Manag. Q. 2005, 5, 321–332. [CrossRef]
118. Preuss, H. The Economic Impact of Visitors at Major Multi-sport Events. Eur. Sport Manag. Q. 2005, 5,
119. Kurtzman, J. Economic impact: Sport tourism and the city. J. Sport Tour. 2001, 6, 14–42. [CrossRef]
120. Kurtzman, J. Economic impact: Sport tourism and the city. J. Sport Tour. 2005, 10, 47–71. [CrossRef]
121. Daniels, M.J.; Norman, W.C. Estimating the Economic Impacts of Seven Regular Sport Tourism Events.
J. Sport Tour. 2003, 8, 214–222. [CrossRef]
122. Nishio, T. The Impact of Sports Events on Inbound Tourism in New Zealand. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2013, 18,
123. Drakakis, P.; Papadaskalopoulos, A.; Lagos, D. Multipliers and impacts of active sport tourism in the Greek
region of Messinia. Tour. Econ. 2020. [CrossRef]
124. Moital, M. The impact of sports events at tourist destination level. Motricidade 2019, 15, 1–5.
125. Perić, M. Estimating the Perceived Socio-Economic Impacts of Hosting Large-Scale Sport Tourism Events.
Soc. Sci. 2018, 7, 176. [CrossRef]
126. Turco, D.M.; Swart, K.; Bob, U.; Moodley, V. Socio-economic Impacts of Sport Tourism in the Durban Unicity,
South Africa. J. Sport Tour. 2003, 8, 223–239. [CrossRef]
127. Njoroge, J.M.; Atieno, L.; Nascimento, D.V.D. Sports Tourism and Perceived Socio-Economic Impact In
Kenya: The Case Of Machakos County. Tour. Hosp. Manag. 2017, 23, 195–217. [CrossRef]
128. Everett, S.; Aitchison, C. The Role of Food Tourism in Sustaining Regional Identity: A Case Study of Cornwall,
South West England. J. Sustain. Tour. 2008, 16, 150–167. [CrossRef]
129. Gonzalez-Garcia, R.J.; Ano-Sanz, V.; Parra-Camacho, D.; Calabuig-Moreno, F. Perception of residents about
the impact of sports tourism on the community: Analysis and scale-validation. J. Phys. Educ. Sport 2018, 18,
149–156.
130. Concari, A.; Kok, G.; Martens, P. A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to
Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary
Approach. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4452. [CrossRef]
131. Fink, A. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper; SAGE Publications: Thousand
Oaks, CA, USA, 2019; ISBN 9781544318486.
132. Baumeister, R.F.; Leary, M.R. Writing Narrative Literature Reviews. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 1997, 1, 311–320.
[CrossRef]
133. Snyder, H. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 104,
134. Ford, J.D.; Pearce, T.; Ford, J.D. Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Reg.
Environ. Chang. 2015, 15, 755–769. [CrossRef]
135. Spasojevic, B.; Lohmann, G.; Scott, N. Air transport and tourism—A systematic literature review (2000–2014).
Curr. Issues Tour. 2017, 21, 975–997. [CrossRef]
136. Carter, R.W.; Thok, S.; O’Rourke, V.; Pearce, T. Sustainable tourism and its use as a development strategy in
Cambodia: A systematic literature review. J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 797–818. [CrossRef]
137. Jiménez-García, M.; Ruiz-Chico, J.; Peña-Sánchez, A.R.; López-Sánchez, J.A. A Bibliometric Analysis of
Sports Tourism and Sustainability (2002–2019). Sustainability 2020, 12, 2840. [CrossRef]
138. Kersulić, A.; Perić, M.; Wise, N. Assessing and Considering the Wider Impacts of Sport-Tourism Events:
A Research Agenda Review of Sustainability and Strategic Planning Elements. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4473.
[CrossRef]
139. Martin, S.A.; Assenov, I. The genesis of a new body of sport tourism literature: A systematic review of surf
tourism research (1997–2011). J. Sport Tour. 2012, 17, 257–287. [CrossRef]
140. Tu, Y.-F.; Hwang, G.-J. Trends and research issues of mobile learning studies in hospitality, leisure, sport and
tourism education: A review of academic publications from 2002 to 2017. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2018, 28,
141. Costa, G.; Glinia, E. Empathy and Sport Tourism Services: A Literature Review. J. Sport Tour. 2003, 8, 284–292.
[CrossRef]
142. Gibson, H.J. Sport Tourism: A Critical Analysis of Research. Sport Manag. Rev. 1998, 1, 45–76. [CrossRef]
143. Weed, M. Sports Tourism Research 2000–2004: A Systematic Review of Knowledge and a Meta-Evaluation of
Methods. J. Sport Tour. 2006, 11, 5–30. [CrossRef]
144. Weed, M. Progress in sports tourism research? A meta-review and exploration of futures. Tour. Manag. 2009,
30, 615–628. [CrossRef]
145. Sánchez-Rebull, M.-V.; Rudchenko, V.; Martín, J.-C. The Antecedents and Consequences of Customer
Satisfaction in Tourism: A Systematic Literature Review. Tour. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 24, 151–183. [CrossRef]
146. Veríssimo, M.; Moraes, M.; Breda, Z.; Guizi, A.; Da Costa, C.M.M. Overtourism and tourismphobia. Tourism
2020, 68, 156–169. [CrossRef]
147. Garcês, S.; Pocinho, M.M.F.D.D.; De Jesus, S.N.; Rieber, M.S.; University of Madeira; University of Algarve.
Positive psychology and tourism: A systematic literature review. Tour. Manag. Stud. 2018, 14, 41–51.
[CrossRef]
148. Saari, R.; Höckert, E.; Lüthje, M.; Kugapi, O.; Mazzullo, N. Cultural sensitivity in Sámi tourism: A systematic
literature review in the Finnish context. Matkailututkimus 2020, 16, 93–110. [CrossRef]
149. Cardoso, L.; Estevão, C.; Fernandes, C.I.; Leitão, J. Film induced tourism: A systematic literature review.
Tour. Manag. Stud. 2017, 13, 23–30. [CrossRef]
150. Heidari, A.; Yazdani, H.R.; Saghafi, F.; Jalilvand, M.R. Developing strategic relationships for religious tourism
businesses: A systematic literature review. EuroMed J. Manag. 2017, 2, 77. [CrossRef]
151. Rachao, S.; Breda, Z.; Fernandes, C.; Joukes, V. Food tourism and regional development: A systematic
literature review. Eur. J. Tour. Res. 2019, 21, 33–49.
152. Park, J.; Jeong, E. Park Service Quality in Tourism: A Systematic Literature Review and Keyword Network
Analysis. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3665. [CrossRef]
153. Peachey, J.W.; Schulenkorf, N.; Hill, P. Sport-for-development: A comprehensive analysis of theoretical and
conceptual advancements. Sport Manag. Rev. 2020, 23, 783–796. [CrossRef]
154. Thees, H.; Pechlaner, H.; Olbrich, N.; Schuhbert, A. The Living Lab as a Tool to Promote Residents’
Participation in Destination Governance. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1120. [CrossRef]
155. QSR International. Qualitative Data Analysis Software|NVivo. Available online: https://www.
qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home (accessed on 11 August 2020).
156. Le, P.T.; Kirytopoulos, K.; Chileshe, N.; Rameezdeen, R. Taxonomy of risks in PPP transportation projects:
A systematic literature review. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2019, 1–16. [CrossRef]
157. Haider, S.Z.; Dilshad, M. Higher Education and Gloval Development: A Cross Cultural Qualitative Study in
Pakistan. High. Educ. Future 2015, 2, 175–193. [CrossRef]
158. Edwards-Jones, A. Qualitative data analysis with NVIVO. J. Educ. Teach. 2014, 40, 193–195. [CrossRef]
159. Ozkan, B.C. Using NVivo to analyze qualitative classroom data on constructivist learning environments.
Qual. Rep. 2004, 9, 589–603.
160. Welsh, E. Dealing with Data: Using NVivo in the Qualitative Data Analysis Process. Forum Qual. Soc. Res.
2002, 3, 20–26.
161. Hinch, T.; Holt, N.L. Sustaining places and participatory sport tourism events. J. Sustain. Tour. 2017, 25,
1084–1099. [CrossRef]
162. Jeong, Y.; Kim, S.-K.; Yu, J.-G. Sustaining Sporting Destinations through Improving Tourists’ Mental and
Physical Health in the Tourism Environment: The Case of Korea. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 17,
122. [CrossRef]
163. Mirehie, M.; Gibson, H. Empirical testing of destination attribute preferences of women snow-sport tourists
along a trajectory of participation. Tour. Recreat. Res. 2020, 45, 526–538. [CrossRef]
164. Buning, R.J.; Gibson, H.J. The role of travel conditions in cycling tourism: Implications for destination and
event management. J. Sport Tour. 2016, 20, 175–193. [CrossRef]
165. Chen, R. Coupling Development Mechanism of Sports Industry and Tourism Industry in Hunan Province.
Ekoloji 2019, 28, 3951–3960.
166. Yfantidou, G.; Spyridopoulou, E.; Kouthouris, C.; Balaska, P.; Matarazzo, M.; Costa, G.; Georgia, Y.; Eleni, S.;
Charilaos, K.; Panagiota, B.; et al. The future of sustainable tourism development for the Greek enterprises
that provide sport tourism. Tour. Econ. 2016, 23, 1155–1162. [CrossRef]
167. Bogan, E.; Moldoveanu, E.A.; Iamandei, M.I. The Perspective of Sports Tourism Development in Bucharest,
Romania. Qual. Access Success 2018, 19, 92–100.
168. Ziakas, V.; Costa, C.A. The Use of an Event Portfolio in Regional Community and Tourism Development:
Creating Synergy between Sport and Cultural Events. J. Sport Tour. 2011, 16, 149–175. [CrossRef]
169. Kim, W.; Jun, H.M.; Walker, M.; Drane, D. Evaluating the perceived social impacts of hosting large-scale
sport tourism events: Scale development and validation. Tour. Manag. 2015, 48, 21–32. [CrossRef]
170. Shams, S.R.; Lombardi, R. Socio-economic value co-creation and sports tourism: Evidence from Tasmania.
World Rev. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2016, 12, 218. [CrossRef]
171. Robinot, É.; Trespeuch, L. Sport Events and Green Values: Which Impacts for Tourism Destinations and
Stakeholders? J. Tour. Res. Hosp. 2018, 7. [CrossRef]
172. Hinch, T.; Ito, E. Sustainable Sport Tourism in Japan. Tour. Plan. Dev. 2018, 15, 96–101. [CrossRef]
173. Mundet, L.; Coenders, G. Greenways: A sustainable leisure experience concept for both communities and
tourists. J. Sustain. Tour. 2010, 18, 657–674. [CrossRef]
174. Usher, L.E.; Gómez, E. Surf localism in Costa Rica: Exploring territoriality among Costa Rican and foreign
resident surfers. J. Sport Tour. 2016, 20, 195–216. [CrossRef]
175. Markovic, J.J.; Petrovic, M.D. Sport and Recreation Influence upon Mountain Area and Sustainable Tourism
Development. J. Environ. Tour. Anal. 2013, 1, 81–90.
176. Rich, K.; Nicholson, M.; Randle, E.; Donaldson, A.; O’Halloran, P.; Staley, K.; Kappelides, P.; Nelson, R.;
Belski, R. Participant-Centered sport development: A case study using the leisure constraints of women in
regional communities. Leis. Sci. 2019, 1–20. [CrossRef]
177. Filo, K.; Chen, N.; King, C.; Funk, D.C. Sport Tourists’ Involvement with a Destination. J. Hosp. Tour. Res.
2011, 37, 100–124. [CrossRef]
178. Ziakas, V. Leveraging Sport Events for Tourism Development: The Event Portfolio Perspective. J. Glob.
Sport Manag. 2020, 1–30. [CrossRef]
179. Kaiser, S.; Alfs, C.; Beech, J.; Kaspar, R. Challenges of tourism development in winter sports destinations and
for post-event tourism marketing: The cases of the Ramsau Nordic Ski World Championships 1999 and the
St Anton Alpine Ski World Championships. J. Sport Tour. 2013, 18, 33–48. [CrossRef]
180. Jeong, Y.; Kim, S.-K.; Yu, J.-G. Determinants of Behavioral Intentions in the Context of Sport Tourism with
the Aim of Sustaining Sporting Destinations. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3073. [CrossRef]
181. Cubizolles, S. Sport and social cohesion in a provincial town in South Africa: The case of a tourism project
for aid and social development through football. Int. Rev. Sociol. Sport 2013, 50, 22–44. [CrossRef]
182. Homafar, F.; Honari, H.; Heidary, A.; Heidary, T.; Emami, A. The role of sport tourism in employment,
income and economic development. J. Hosp. Manag. Tour. 2011, 2, 34–37. [CrossRef]
183. Ghotnian, S.; Najafizadeh, M.; Roughani, M. Factors of sustainable development of sports Tourism: Identifying
barriers and outlines. Int. Res. J. Appl. Basic Sci. 2013, 4, 2598–2601.
184. Lin, H.-W.; Lu, H.-F. Valuing Residents’ Perceptions of Sport Tourism Development in Taiwan’s North Coast
and Guanyinshan National Scenic Area. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2016, 21, 398–424. [CrossRef]
185. Wood, A.L.; Butler, J.R.; Sheaves, M.; Wani, J. Sport fisheries: Opportunities and challenges for diversifying
coastal livelihoods in the Pacific. Mar. Policy 2013, 42, 305–314. [CrossRef]
186. Pookaiyaudom, G. The Development of the Thai Long-boat Race as a Sports Tourism and Cultural Product.
Tour. Plan. Dev. 2017, 16, 61–74. [CrossRef]
187. Jæger, K. Event start-ups as catalysts for place, sport and tourism development: Moment scapes and
geographical considerations. Sport Soc. 2020, 23, 40–55. [CrossRef]
188. Kim, H.; Choe, Y.; Kim, D.; Kim, J.J. For Sustainable Benefits and Legacies of Mega-Events: A Case Study of
the 2018 PyeongChang Winter Olympics from the Perspective of the Volunteer Co-Creators. Sustainability
2019, 11, 2473. [CrossRef]
189. Dobay, G. Effects of Sport Tourism on Temperate Grassland Communities (Duna-Ipoly National Park,
Hungary). Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2017, 15, 457–472. [CrossRef]
190. Wang, X.; Long, Y. Development and research on rural regional characteristic sports tourism industry: A case
study of Southern Jiangxi Province. Asian Agric. Res. 2014, 6, 27–30.
191. Laws, E.; Agrusa, J.F.; Richins, H. Tourist Destination Governance: Practice, Theory and Issues; CAB International:
Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011; ISBN 9781845938314.
192. Dissart, J.-C.; Dehez, J.; Marsat, J.-B. (Eds.) Tourism, Recreation and Regional Development: Perspectives from
France and Abroad; Routledge: London, UK, 2017; ISBN 9781138083844.
193. Dredge, D.; Gyimóthy, S. Collaborative Economy and Tourism. Perspectives, Politics, Policies and Prospects;
Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; ISBN 9783319517995.
194. Ritchie, B.J.R.; Crouch, G.I. Competitive Destination: A Sustainable Tourism Perspective, 2nd ed.; CABI Publishing:
Cambridge, UK, 2005.
195. Finn, A. Fast Friends: A Running Camp in Kenya. The Guardian, 16 April 2011. Available online:
https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/apr/16/iten-kenya-running-athletics-training-camp (accessed on
30 October 2020).
196. Finn, A. Five of the Best Running Holidays. Financial Times, 19 July 2019. Available online: https:
//www.ft.com/content/c1314c7a-a6d2-11e9-90e9-fc4b9d9528b4 (accessed on 30 October 2020).
197. Pechlaner, H.; Herntrei, M.; Kofink, L. Growth strategies in mature destinations: Linking spatial planning
with product development. Tour. Int. Interdiscip. J. 2009, 57, 285–307.
198. Băndoi, A.; Jianu, E.; Enescu, M.; Axinte, G.; Sorin, T.; Firoiu, D. The Relationship between Development
of Tourism, Quality of Life and Sustainable Performance in EU Countries. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1628.
[CrossRef]
199. Beritelli, P.; Buffa, F.; Martini, U. The coordinating DMO or coordinators in the DMO?—An alternative
perspective with the help of network analysis. Tour. Rev. 2015, 70, 24–42. [CrossRef]
200. Weidenfeld, A. Tourism Diversification and Its Implications for Smart Specialisation. Sustainability 2018, 10,
319. [CrossRef]
201. Lyras, A.; Peachey, J.W. Integrating sport-for-development theory and praxis. Sport Manag. Rev. 2011, 14,
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
© 2020. This work is licensed under
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding
the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance
with the terms of the License.

The Host Community and Its Rol

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Host Community and Its Rol

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Host Community and Its Rol

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

1. Introduction and Problem Definition

Sustainability 2020, 12, 10488; doi:10.3390/su122410488 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

2. Theoretical Background: Sports Tourism in the Context of Community Development

2.1. Community and Community Development

2.2. Community-Based Tourism as a Development Approach

Table 1. Alternative Forms of Tourism.

Form Characteristics Problems/Issues

2.3. Sports Tourism and Its Relevance for Local Development

2.4. Deriving a Conceptual Framework for Local Sports Tourism

3. Methodology: Systematic Literature Review

• ‘Tourism’ AND ‘Community’ AND ‘Sport’

Table 3. Distribution of Publishing Dates.

4. Results: Framing the Research Field

4.1. Word Cloud: Visualizing the Central Terms

Figure 5. Frequently occurring keywords. Source: own elaboration using NVivo©.

4.2. Cluster Analysis: Thematic Proximity

4.3. Research Features of Articles

Table 4. Theories, Concepts, Research Aims, and Methods.

Theories & Concepts

• Leisure constraint theory [176]

Aim of the study Methods

• Identification of development mechanism [115,165,176,181]

Source: Own elaboration.

4.4. Challenges and Benefits of Sports Tourism in/for Local Communities

Table 5. Challenges and Benefits.

Statements Key Issues

• Underestimation of sport tourism as a source of employment [182]

• Place-identity and place-pride enhancement [25,63,129]

Source: Own elaboration.

5. Discussion: The Community as a Host in Sports Tourism

Figure 7. Addressing the interfaces within the sports-community-tourism triangle. Source:

5.1. Approaching Identity-Based Product Development

5.2. Local Engagement as a Success Factor

• Local authorities, politicians, and bodies [25,63,129,181]

6. Conclusions: Recommendations for Future Research

You might also like