Writing Guidelines for “Tourism Recognition and Reference Systems”

Tourism recognition and reference systems include awards, certifications, indexes and related mechanisms used to recognize achievement, verify conformity or compare tourism performance.

Entries should objectively explain the system’s owner, purpose, criteria, methodology, participation rules, results, validity, transparency, tourism significance and current status.

Entry Format

1) Entry Title
[Official Name of the Award / Certification / Index]

Use the current official English name. The original name, acronym, issuing institution, country or system type may be added in parentheses.

Examples:

• World Travel Awards
• Blue Flag (Environmental Award)
• Green Key (Environmental Certification)
• Travel & Tourism Development Index (TTDI)
• Global Destination Sustainability Index (GDS-Index)
• Former names and discontinued versions should be explained in the main text.

2) Introductory Statement
The introductory statement should not exceed 250 characters. Identify the system type, responsible institution, principal subjects, geographical scope and purpose.

Introductory Statement (≤250 characters): [Write the introductory statement here.]

3) Main Text
The entry text must be between 400 and 3,000 words. The “See Also” and “References” sections are excluded from the word count.

3.1 Definition, System Type, and Scope
Define and classify the subject as an award, certification, index, ranking, rating, label, verification or accreditation system.

Important distinctions:

• Award: Formal recognition granted through nomination, assessment or selection.
• Certification: Third-party confirmation that specified requirements have been met.
• Index: A quantitative or composite measure used to compare or monitor performance.
• Ranking: An ordered comparison that may be based on an index.
• Rating: A score, grade, level or symbol assigned according to stated criteria.
• Label: A designation communicating particular attributes; it is not necessarily independently certified.
• Verification: Confirmation that specified information or claims are accurate.
• Accreditation: Formal recognition of the competence of a certification, inspection or assessment body.

Use terminology that reflects the system’s actual legal and methodological status.

3.2 Institution, Governance, and Historical Development
Provide:

• Establishment date and place
• Founders and founding institutions
• Current owner, organizer or publisher
• Legal and administrative structure
• Jury, technical committee, auditors or methodology team
• Sponsors, partners and data providers
• Former names and ownership changes
• First award cycle, certification or index edition
• Major revisions, mergers, suspensions or relaunches
• Distinguish the system owner from assessors, certification bodies, sponsors and data providers.

3.3 Purpose, Eligibility, and Participation
Explain:

• Principal objectives
• Intended users
• Eligible applicants, nominees or assessed units
• Geographic and sectoral requirements
• Application, nomination or inclusion process
• Required documents, data, audits or inspections
• Participation, audit, renewal or logo-use fees
• Whether participation is voluntary, compulsory, automatic or invitation-based
• State whether the system assesses all eligible entities or only those that apply, pay, submit data or are nominated.

3.4 Criteria, Standards, and Methodology
Describe:

• Award categories
• Certification requirements
• Index pillars and indicators
• Quantitative and qualitative criteria
• Thresholds, scores and weights
• Voting, jury, audit or inspection procedures
• Data sources and calculation methods
• Treatment of missing data and methodological changes
• Quality-control and validation procedures
• Summarize copyrighted standards and criteria instead of reproducing them in full. If the methodology is not public, state this limitation.

3.5 Results, Validity, and Renewal
Explain the form of recognition or result, such as:

• Winner or finalist
• Certificate or label
• Score or ranking position
• Medal, star or recognition level
• State the announcement frequency, edition or reference year, validity period, renewal requirements and procedures for suspension, withdrawal or revocation.

Awards and certificates should not be presented as permanently valid unless this is explicitly documented.

3.6 Transparency, Independence, and Conflicts of Interest
Assess:

• Public availability of criteria and methodology
• Independence of juries, auditors and assessors
• Accreditation or external oversight
• Conflict-of-interest rules
• Appeals and complaint procedures
• Methodological review and correction
• Sponsorship, advertising and commercial relationships
• Entry, audit, ceremony and logo-use fees
• Commercial relationships should be disclosed and evaluated fairly. Their existence alone does not prove that a system is invalid.

3.7 Geographic Coverage and Comparability
State:

• Countries, regions and sectors covered
• Number and type of participants
• Growth or reduction in participation
• Availability of historical data
• Representation gaps
• Language, cost and data-access barriers
• Comparability across countries, editions and years
• Participant and coverage figures should be linked to a specific year, cycle or edition. Results should not be compared across years when the methodology or participating units have changed substantially.

3.8 Tourism Significance and Limitations
Assess the system’s influence on:

• Tourism marketing and destination image
• Quality and sustainability
• Consumer confidence
• Policy and planning
• Benchmarking and business improvement
• Accessibility, safety and innovation
• Tourism research and professional development

Relevant limitations may include:

• Selection and voting bias
• Self-reported or commercially supplied data
• Lack of transparency
• Unequal access for smaller businesses
• Cultural or geographic bias
• Methodological instability
• Greenwashing
• Award and label proliferation
• Misleading interpretation of scores or rankings
• Separate organizer claims from independently demonstrated effects.

3.9 Current Status and Evaluation
Conclude with:

• Whether the system remains active
• Current owner or responsible institution
• Latest edition, cycle or standard version
• Recent methodological or governance changes
• Current geographical coverage
• Historical and institutional importance
• Methodological credibility
• Principal contributions and limitations
• Future prospects
• State the information cut-off date for rapidly changing systems.

System-Specific Emphasis

Awards
Focus on the awarding organization, categories, eligibility, nomination, jury or voting process, selection criteria, sponsors, fees, recipients and industry influence.

An award should not be described as a certification merely because recipients receive a certificate or logo.

Certifications
Focus on the scheme owner, standard, requirements, certification body, audit process, accreditation, validity, surveillance, renewal and public registry.

Do not use “internationally accredited” unless the accreditation body, standard, scope and current status are verified.

Indexes
Focus on the publisher, analytical purpose, assessed units, indicators, data sources, normalization, weighting, aggregation, reference year and comparability.

Index scores and rankings should not be compared across editions without considering methodological changes.

Writing Principles

• Use a neutral and non-promotional style.
• Use the exact official title.
• Distinguish awards, certifications, accreditation, indexes, rankings and ratings.
• Identify owners, assessors, auditors, sponsors and data providers separately.
• Date criteria, results, fees, scores and rankings.
• State the edition, cycle, reference year and standard version.
• Explain how participants enter the system.
• Separate organizer claims from measured outcomes.
• Disclose commercial relationships.
• Avoid unsupported terms such as “best,” “prestigious,” “independent” or “globally recognized.”
• Verify that the system remains active.

Tables and Visual Materials

• Tables may summarize categories, criteria, indicators, recognition levels or methodological changes. All tables and charts must state their source, reference year, unit and scope.

Logos, certificates, trophies and screenshots may be used only with appropriate permission and copyright information.

See Also

List three to eight related awards, certifications, indexes, standards, institutions or tourism concepts.

Citation and References

Use APA 7th edition. Every source cited in the text must appear in the reference list, and every reference must be cited in the text.

Detailed information: https://apastyle.apa.org/