Making tourism accessible: Virtual Reality as an alternative means of tourism for people with disabilities

According to the United Nations Development Program (2020), people are excluded from development due to their gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disability, or poverty. Inclusive development can only be achieved by the contribution of disadvantaged groups in the decision-making of development strategies. Therefore, it is important, that disadvantaged groups are represented in decision making (UNDP, 2020).
Disabled people are one of the most overlooked customer segments in tourism. Nevertheless, disabled people often face difficulties concerning accessibility which include problematic physical accessibility, difficulties of transportation or overall carelessness in attitude of service providers. Nevertheless, disabled people have the same touristic and recreational needs and desires as the mainstream customer segment (Yau et al., 2004).
The latest attempt for making tourism accessible are Virtual Reality solutions. Virtual reality is defined as a computer simulation which is aimed towards creating a three-dimensional world containing interactive three-dimensional objects. Be that as it may, VR has the capacity to be deeply beneficial for the often-overlooked disabled customer segment in the tourism industry (Sussmann and Vanhegan, 2000). Second Life is an existing VR solution for disabled people, where they can carry out tasks they could not in a physical environment. Solutions as such were proven to be advantageous for disabled people (Bennet and Beith, 2007). Overall, VR appreciates an overwhelmingly positive attitude regarding its’ potential as a substitute product for tourism, as it is thought to be the best alternative solution for visiting sites which are too dangerous, too remote, too expensive, extremely fragile to accommodate traditional physical tourism, or the location simply no longer exists (Paquet and Viktor, 2005).

To prove VR’s capacity of becoming a widespread substitute for tourism activities, it is important to address some of the most relevant criticism VR has received. The most relevant issues include low detail images, pre-defined paths, lack of freedom and interaction, stuttering and frame rate drops. Studies show, that unbalanced and stuttering image can cause disorientation (Gaitatez et al., 2001). Further criticisms suggest, travelling is a social occasion, and travelers are keen on learning local customs, therefore VR will never be able to fully substitute tourism (Musil and Pigel, 1994). However, numerous projects were dedicated to reflecting traditions. For instance, a project of virtually reconstructing medieval Cairo concludes by Abdelmonem et al., (2017), that unique efforts were put towards implementing virtual vendors and craftsmen in the recreation of Souk Al-Khayamiyyah market. The virtual merchants are intended to carry out traditional crafts and arts precisely as it was done in the past allowing users to learn about culture. High cost is another relevant criticism which needs to be addressed (Abdelmonem et al., 2017). However, commercial virtual reality devices, with high definition image and a 90-degree field of view are available for customers starting from 300$ (Desai et al., 2014), which is can be considered as a fraction of a holiday costs. Regarding accessibility, it is important to acknowledge the improvement of sign language recognition gloves (stringloves), which are specially designed gloves which capability of recognising the bend, position and contact between fingers and fingertips in order to convert the data into written data, as well as vocalised data into a displayed sign language with an additional software. This equipment proves to be extremely useful for people with hearing disability (Kuroda et al., 2004). Virtual reality is also criticized for complexity in usage (Abdelmonem et al., 2017). Even though, VR software requires excellent professional knowledge to develop, the use of commercial VR headsets, such as the Oculus headset is relatively simple (Ruyg et al., 2014).

Abdelmonem, M.G., Selim, G., Mushatat, S. and Almogren, A. (2017) Virtual platforms for heritage preservation in the Middle East: the case of medieval Cairo. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR, 11(3) 28-41.

Desai, P.R., Desai, P.N., Ajmera, K.D. and Mehta, K., (2014). A review paper on oculus rift-a virtual reality headset. International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 13(4) 175-179.

Bennett, J., & Beith, M. (2007, 30 July). Why millions are living virtual lives online.
Newsweek. http://www.newsweek.com/id/32824. [accessed 29 April 2020].

Gaitatzes, A., Christopoulos, D. and Roussou, M. (2001) Reviving the past: cultural heritage meets virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on Virtual reality, archeology, and cultural heritage. November. 103-110. Available from https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/584993.585011 [accessed 2 February 2020].

Musil S., Pigel G. (1994) Can Tourism be Replaced by Virtual Reality Technology?. In: Schertler W., Schmid B., Tjoa A.M., Werthner H. (eds) Information and Communications Technologies in Tourism, Springer, Wien, January. Wien, Austria: Vienna User Interface GroupWienAustria, 87-94. Available from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-7091-9343-3_14 [accessed 29 April 2020].

Paquet, E. and Viktor, H.L. (2005). Long-term preservation of 3-D cultural heritage data related to architectural sites. Proceedings of the ISPRS Working Group, 4, pp.1-8.

Ruyg, M., Teunisse, C. and Verhage, S., (2014). Virtual reality for the web: Oculus Rift. Leida: Leiden University.

Sussmann, S. and Vanhegan, H. (2000) Virtual reality and the tourism product substitution or complement?. Surrey, UK: University of Surrey.

United Nations Development Program. (2020). Inclusive Development. Available from https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html [accessed 1 May 2020].

Yau, M.K.S., McKercher, B. and Packer, T.L., (2004). Traveling with a disability: More than an access issue. Annals of tourism research, 31(4) 946-960.

I have chosen to comment on this article as the title caught my eye, and I was keen to read about how VR (Virtual Reality) can be a means of tourism for people with disabilities.

The author mentions that disabled people are the most overlooked customer in relation to tourism (UNDP, 2020) which is an absolutely shocking discovery. The author continues to mention how those with a disability often face struggles within tourism sectors, mainly facing issues with accessibility (Yau et al., 2004) It is important to remember that although some individuals with a disability face issues within tourism, they still have the same needs and desires as other people who interact with tourism in some way.

The author has stated that the latest attempt to make tourism more inclusive is through Virtual Reality. Which is a very impressive way to use technology to enhance not only the lives of those wishing to partake in tourism, but also the tourism industry as a whole. The author mentions a company called ‘Second Life’ which specialises in Virtual Reality for those with disabilities, enabling them to take part in activities they may not be able to do in daily life, which is a great way to enrich the lives of individuals and help them discover new things. VR is mentioned to have brought an overwhelmingly positive response to those using VR as a substitute to tourism (Bennet and Beith, 2007).

Although it is important to understand that while VR enables users to experience different visuals of countries, it does not provide the ‘full’ tourism experience, such as indulging in local cuisine and engaging in local cultures (Gaitatez et al,. 2001). The cost of a VR set is around $300, which is significantly lower than the typical tourist trip, suggesting VR could be a ‘cheaper’ alternative for those who could incur costly expenses if travelling abroad with a disability.

This was an incredibly interesting paper to read, and the author has gone into great detail in regards to how VR can help enhance tourism for those with a disability. The paper was informative and well written. A really enjoyable read about an equally interesting topic.




Gaitatzes, A., Christopoulos, D. and Roussou, M. (2001) Reviving the past: cultural heritage meets virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on Virtual reality, archeology, and cultural heritage. November. 103-110. Available from https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/584993.585011 [accessed 2 February 2020].

United Nations Development Program. (2020). Inclusive Development. Available from https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html [accessed 1 May 2020].

Yau, M.K.S., McKercher, B. and Packer, T.L., (2004). Traveling with a disability: More than an access issue. Annals of tourism research, 31(4) 946-960.

I have decided to comment on this article because it is related to my own conference paper which means that I do have some knowledge about it, and I have found it interesting to see Virtual Reality as an alternative for people with disabilities.
The author explained that the latest attempt for making tourism accessible is through Virtual Reality solutions, I found this solution surprising as I have never heard of this solution before. As author explains the solution has proven to be advantageous for disabled people. (Bennet and Beith, 2007) The author also assessed the relevant issues with the VR technology and using it as an alternative for disabled people. The issues included low detail images, pre-defined paths, lack of freedom and interaction, and studies even show that unbalanced and stuttering image can cause disorientation. (Gaitatez etl al, 2001)

Even though there are many advantages and disadvantages of VR, the biggest issue is that the VR does not completely replace the travel experience. I would argue that even though the VR is a great entertainment for many people, including disabled people, it will never replace the actual tourism experience as it is not real, it is all virtual. However, VR could help disabled people to plan their accessible routes around the destination they want to visit, by using the VR it could help increase their safety and reduce anxiety. Developers of shopping centres, tourist attractions etc. could use VR to plan their spaces as inclusively as possible to make it accessible for disabled visitors. (Cahalane, 2018)

Overall, the paper is very interesting, the author has investigated strengths and weaknesses of the VR. This type or research is useful not only in the tourism industry but also in the disabled people market, as this type of research helps to understand how tourism could be more accessible for disabled people and also this type of research would create more awareness and developers of tourist attractions etc. could consider implementing VR to make their sites more accessible.

References:

Bennett, J., & Beith, M. (2007, 30 July). Why millions are living virtual lives online.
Newsweek. http://www.newsweek.com/id/32824. [accessed 14 May 2020].

Cahalane, C., 2018. 6 Ways Virtual Reality Could Transform The Lives Of Disabled People. [online] Digital Leaders. Available at: <https://digileaders.com/6-ways-virtual-reality-could-transform-the-lives-of-disabled-people/> [Accessed 14 May 2020].

Gaitatzes, A., Christopoulos, D. and Roussou, M. (2001) Reviving the past: cultural heritage meets virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on Virtual reality, archeology, and cultural heritage. November. 103-110. Available from https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/584993.585011 [accessed 14 May 2020].