Sustainable Development and Leisure Services: Changes and Trends
3
responsibility (Dąbrowska 2013; Magee et al. 2012; Murphy 2012). The latter seems
to be one of the most important areas in the context of leisure. Social responsibility is
the ethical framework in the form of rights and obligations, and it serves as a reminder
of the need to carry out active and passive human activities (e.g. volunteering, responsible digitisation of leisure) for the benefit of others, while maintaining balance with
other pillars of sustainable development (Silk et al. 2016). In other words, the aim of
‘social responsibility’ is to remove all barriers and to deliberately involve people and
communities who are excluded from participation in socio-economic life, in which
leisure determines the quality of life.
An uncontrolled shift from physical activity to eLeisure, eTourism, eSport and
virtual reality (Carlson and O’Cass 2011; Lubowiecki-Vikuk and Sousa 2020; Miah
2017; Nimrod and Adoni 2012) may have not only a negative impact on health (see
Kuykendall et al. 2020) but may also seriously disrupt social relations. There is
scientific evidence that although online social networks (which were established to
engage people through social communication and interaction and fulfill various functions in the personal sphere) may improve the sustainability of tourism (Sobhanifard
and Vaeysi 2020), it must be clearly stressed that this is in regards to the tourism
industry itself and not the social dimension of tourism. In the broader context of
leisure, emphasis is placed on social capital as a factor that protects against social
isolation and at the same time influences the quality of life (Dahl and MalmbergHeimonen 2010; Lyu et al. 2019). However, this is not an easy solution either. The
study by Horolets et al. (2019) clearly shows that ‘for some rural-to-urban immigrants, practices of social capital maintenance became disconnected from recreation
in natural environments, while for all participants, nature-related cultural capital had
low transferability in a migratory situation’ (Horolets et al. 2019, p. 313). Depending
on their position in a new social situation, immigrants have developed different
strategies to use their local environment for recreational purposes. Some strategies
have contributed to the preservation of the old habits, while one strategy (finding
substitutes) has contributed to a gradual change in the habits related to the nature
of immigrants. Therefore, society should be encouraged to experience leisure with
greater involvement in real, non-virtual human interactions. This should apply not
only to the elderly but also to younger generations, while maintaining respect for
their cultural identity, customs and habits.
Bedford et al. (2011) have pointed out that in general the issue of sustainable
leisure (also called serious leisure) is not as well recognized as the issue of leisure
in the context of a sustainable lifestyle. The latter goes beyond consumerism and
redirects leisure towards spending time outdoors or developing one’s own passions
instead of going shopping (Jackson 2009).
In a context of (still growing) social inequality and ‘inequalities’ in leisure (Aguiar
and Hurst 2007), particular attention should be paid to sustainable lifestyles and the
place of leisure in the hierarchy of needs. Jensen (2007) suggests that the sustainable lifestyle should be analyzed from several perspectives, due to its complexity.
Social and cultural processes need to be addressed in a broader sense. ‘Structural
changes’ are necessary to enable ‘lifestyle choices’ that are conducive to sustainable development, but it is also important to go beyond ‘sustainable development’
3
responsibility (Dąbrowska 2013; Magee et al. 2012; Murphy 2012). The latter seems
to be one of the most important areas in the context of leisure. Social responsibility is
the ethical framework in the form of rights and obligations, and it serves as a reminder
of the need to carry out active and passive human activities (e.g. volunteering, responsible digitisation of leisure) for the benefit of others, while maintaining balance with
other pillars of sustainable development (Silk et al. 2016). In other words, the aim of
‘social responsibility’ is to remove all barriers and to deliberately involve people and
communities who are excluded from participation in socio-economic life, in which
leisure determines the quality of life.
An uncontrolled shift from physical activity to eLeisure, eTourism, eSport and
virtual reality (Carlson and O’Cass 2011; Lubowiecki-Vikuk and Sousa 2020; Miah
2017; Nimrod and Adoni 2012) may have not only a negative impact on health (see
Kuykendall et al. 2020) but may also seriously disrupt social relations. There is
scientific evidence that although online social networks (which were established to
engage people through social communication and interaction and fulfill various functions in the personal sphere) may improve the sustainability of tourism (Sobhanifard
and Vaeysi 2020), it must be clearly stressed that this is in regards to the tourism
industry itself and not the social dimension of tourism. In the broader context of
leisure, emphasis is placed on social capital as a factor that protects against social
isolation and at the same time influences the quality of life (Dahl and MalmbergHeimonen 2010; Lyu et al. 2019). However, this is not an easy solution either. The
study by Horolets et al. (2019) clearly shows that ‘for some rural-to-urban immigrants, practices of social capital maintenance became disconnected from recreation
in natural environments, while for all participants, nature-related cultural capital had
low transferability in a migratory situation’ (Horolets et al. 2019, p. 313). Depending
on their position in a new social situation, immigrants have developed different
strategies to use their local environment for recreational purposes. Some strategies
have contributed to the preservation of the old habits, while one strategy (finding
substitutes) has contributed to a gradual change in the habits related to the nature
of immigrants. Therefore, society should be encouraged to experience leisure with
greater involvement in real, non-virtual human interactions. This should apply not
only to the elderly but also to younger generations, while maintaining respect for
their cultural identity, customs and habits.
Bedford et al. (2011) have pointed out that in general the issue of sustainable
leisure (also called serious leisure) is not as well recognized as the issue of leisure
in the context of a sustainable lifestyle. The latter goes beyond consumerism and
redirects leisure towards spending time outdoors or developing one’s own passions
instead of going shopping (Jackson 2009).
In a context of (still growing) social inequality and ‘inequalities’ in leisure (Aguiar
and Hurst 2007), particular attention should be paid to sustainable lifestyles and the
place of leisure in the hierarchy of needs. Jensen (2007) suggests that the sustainable lifestyle should be analyzed from several perspectives, due to its complexity.
Social and cultural processes need to be addressed in a broader sense. ‘Structural
changes’ are necessary to enable ‘lifestyle choices’ that are conducive to sustainable development, but it is also important to go beyond ‘sustainable development’