Disability-Friendly Hospitality Services as a Catalyst for Empowering Inclusive Tourism in Indonesia

Abstract

Inclusive tourism is designed to ensure accessibility for all travelers, including individuals with disabilities, and the concept has been garnering increasing attention recently. Previous scholars have explored the experiences of disabled tourists, but this study shifts the focus to hospitality providers by examining their role in delivering inclusive services. Significant implementation gaps persist despite the existence of policies promoting inclusivity, and the situation shows the need to understand how the hospitality sector perceives and addresses accessibility challenges. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate accessibility within the Indonesian hospitality sector by analyzing key challenges related to infrastructure, service quality, and industry commitment. The service quality model developed by Parasuraman et al. was applied to assess gaps in tangibility, responsiveness, and empathy through qualitative methods, including stakeholder interviews and observational analyses. Moreover, a specialized framework developed by Stonesifer and Kim was incorporated to enhance hotel experiences for guests with disabilities. The results showed that accessibility remained a secondary concern, often overshadowed by cost considerations, infrastructure limitations, and the weak enforcement of relevant standards. Several hospitality providers prioritize minimal legal compliance over proactive accessibility improvements. It was also observed that limited awareness, inadequate staff training, and financial constraints further widened the gap between policy and practice. Furthermore, weak enforcement mechanisms hindered the establishment of consistent accessibility standards. This study contributes to the discourse on inclusive tourism by identifying critical gaps and emphasizing the need for stronger collaboration, policy reinforcement, and industry engagement. Addressing these challenges can foster a more inclusive hospitality sector that benefits all tourists. The identification of areas for improvement also provides valuable insights for policymakers and industry stakeholders aiming to enhance accessibility standards in the Indonesian tourism sector.

1. Introduction

Disability is considered to have a profound impact on several individuals in Indonesia. This is observed from the data presented by the 2020 National Socio-Economic Survey (Susenas) that approximately 28.05 million individuals, or 10.38% of the population, experience some form of disability [1]. Indonesia enacted Law No. 8/2016 in line with the 2011 ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). This legislation commits the government to eliminating discrimination against individuals with disabilities while actively providing support and services. It also emphasizes the importance of ensuring that public programs are inclusive and accessible to everyone.

The law influenced the national tourism development agenda initiated in Indonesia. This was observed from the fact that the conversations on the enhancement of tourist accessibility in the agenda led to two significant concepts, including barrier-free and accessible tourism. These notions show a shift towards inclusivity and accommodation within the tourism industry. Accessible tourism, as delineated by Qiao et al. [2], strives to facilitate seamless access to tourist destinations and activities for individuals with special needs in order to ensure their autonomous engagement. Meanwhile, barrier-free tourism has a broader scope, focusing on the development of tourism infrastructure and services that cater to the diverse requirements of all tourists [3]. The introduction of this method underscores a commitment to fostering an environment where tourism not only yields economic benefits but also promotes social and ethical responsibility. Agovino [4] also stated that the essence of barrier-free tourism was unwavering in its dedication to offering equitable access to all individuals, irrespective of their physical or cognitive capabilities. Efforts to embrace these principles can expand the market reach and bolster the reputation of the Indonesian tourism sector as a destination that champions inclusivity and diversity.

The provision of equal opportunities for everyone, regardless of disability, to participate in activities comfortably and safely is a fundamental right enshrined in the 1945 Indonesian Constitution. This principle showed the significance of physical accessibility in promoting inclusivity, as explained by Indrasti and Jalil [5]. Therefore, Litman [6] defined accessibility as both the physical ease of reaching a place as well as the consideration of factors such as cost, time, and the effort associated with transportation. Accessibility was also considered by Poothullil et al. to go beyond physical entry due to its focus on the effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction experienced by all individuals, including those with disabilities, in accessing products, services, and environments [7]. Garcia-Miranda and Duran Heras [8] reinforced the idea by emphasizing that accessibility included the ease of reaching goods, services, activities, and objectives to ensure inclusivity for all members of society. The trend shows that the concept of accessibility represents a holistic method to enable universal participation and exhibit a commitment to equality and social inclusion.

Article 18 of Law No. 8 of 2016 states that the entitlements regarding accessibility for individuals with disabilities include access to public facilities and the provision of suitable accommodations. These rights extend across different domains, including physical and cultural accessibility, environmental factors, housing, transportation, social and health services, educational opportunities, and participation in social activities such as sports and recreation. Despite the substantial global population of individuals with disabilities, their rights are often not satisfied, particularly in the context of tourism. It is important that ensuring accessibility to all tourism facilities, products, and services becomes a central aspect of every tourism policy. The prioritization of accessibility as a fundamental component of efforts to enhance the offerings and competitiveness of the hospitality and tourism industry can contribute significantly to establishing an inclusive tourism environment and service provision.

East Java, a province in Indonesia, is experiencing rapid growth in its tourism sector due to the introduction of new hotels [9]. As part of its development, the province is actively promoting inclusivity and creating disability-friendly environments across different sectors, including accommodation facilities such as hotels. The consideration of hotels as very important to the tourism industry is due to the lodging services provided. This leads to the need for both physical structures and services to be accessible and welcoming to guests with disabilities. However, several hotels lack adequate facilities and services to fully accommodate disabled visitors [10]. Accessible accommodation is vital for individuals with disabilities, who have historically had limited options compared to the general population [11]. Therefore, there is an urgent need for studies on innovative methods within the hotel industry in East Java to meet the needs of disabled guests and promote disability inclusivity within the tourism and hospitality sector.

Discussions on inclusivity and accommodation in the tourism industry primarily focus on the experiences of disabled tourists [12] and disability employment [13]. However, there is a significant gap in studies examining the role of accommodation, particularly within the hotel industry, in promoting inclusivity. This gap is especially evident in Indonesia, where tourism contributes significantly to the economy but there is limited accessible infrastructure for travelers with disabilities. Therefore, efforts to ensure hotel accessibility are important in shaping the experiences of guests with specific needs, but this area remains underexplored in academic studies [14].

A study titled “Developing an Implementation Model for Gender Equality and Disability Inclusivity at Marriott Group Hotels in Bali to Foster Sustainable Tourism” shows the importance of inclusivity in the hospitality sector [15]. The study emphasized that gender policies were generally implemented but disability inclusivity was limited in several observed hotels. Therefore, comprehensive models to enhance inclusivity were recommended to support sustainable tourism.

Initiatives such as the collaboration between INKLUSI and the East Java Accor Hotels Group show the efforts currently being implemented to promote inclusivity. Accor Hotels Group has committed to principles that combat discrimination and support the development of talents and abilities fairly for everyone. The company also provides internship opportunities for individuals with disabilities and trans women in addition to the possibility of recruitment when qualifications are fulfilled [16]. These results showed the importance of further studies on hotel accessibility to ensure an inclusive environment for all travelers. Therefore, the following question was formulated to be answered: “how do hospitality providers in Indonesia perceive and address accessibility challenges in infrastructure, service quality, and industry commitment to delivering inclusive services?” The aim is to evaluate the implementation of inclusive practices within the sector by analyzing the key challenges and identifying existing gaps. Moreover, case studies were used to shed light on innovative methods within the hospitality industry in order to accommodate the needs of disabled guests towards promoting disability inclusivity and enhancing the overall tourism experience for all travelers.

2. Literature Review

Individuals with disabilities are characterized by varying degrees of physical or mental impairments, ranging from short-term to long-term or permanent effects, which affect their ability to conduct daily activities [17,18]. Disabilities are further defined as functional limitations and impairments that cause challenges during the process of engaging in one or more activities and fulfilling normative social roles typically deemed essential in daily life, such as self-care, social interactions, and economic participation [19]. Consequently, both physical and mental limitations are often viewed as making individuals with disabilities unfit for tourist activities, which further leads to perceptions of incapacity and unworthiness of contributing to tourism development. Most tourist destinations and attractions lack facilities catering to the needs of disabled travelers. The physical constraints encountered can pose specific challenges in different environmental scenarios, including navigating long distances, ascending stairs, and handling certain objects, particularly for those using crutches or requiring arm support for balance.

Some important difficulties are often experienced by individuals with disabilities in accessing tourist attractions, hotels, and travel facilities in Indonesia. Adiningrat, Abdillah, and Dewantara [20] studied the quality of hotel services for disabled tourists and reported several factors contributing to the lack of optimal facilities, such as insufficient specialized staff training and inadequate regional regulations concerning disabilities. Similarly, Pagan emphasized the importance of supportive facilities customized to the needs of special-interest tourists, showing the broader challenge of enhancing service quality for this demographic [21].

These challenges were addressed through the SERVQUAL model, developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry, to provide a valuable framework for assessing and improving service quality in the hospitality industry [22]. This model evaluates service quality through five key dimensions, including tangibility, which refers to the physical facilities, equipment, and appearance of personnel. Another is reliability, which shows the ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately. There is also responsiveness, which assesses the willingness to assist customers and provide prompt service. Another is assurance, which focuses on the knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence. The last is empathy, which reflects the provision of caring and individualized attention to customers [23]. The dimensions are further presented in Figure 1.

The analysis of the gap between customer expectations and perceptions across five dimensions [24] allows SERVQUAL to identify specific areas requiring enhancement. Its adaptability and effectiveness make SERVQUAL a powerful tool for addressing the barriers faced by disabled tourists. This power is also due to its ability to offer actionable insights to improve accessibility and inclusivity in competitive industries where customer satisfaction is paramount [25].

Stonesifer and Kim [26] developed a specialized framework aimed at enhancing the hotel experience for guests with disabilities. The authors identified six key components critical to meeting the needs of the demographic. The theoretical foundation and practical analysis of each component are outlined as follows:

1.

Evaluate and expand sensitivity training programs.

Sensitivity training is the most significant area requiring improvement, because guest feedback shows widespread dissatisfaction with staff interactions. Training programs were often inadequate or infrequent, leading to discomfort and misunderstanding among hotel staff. Stonesifer and Kim suggested more regular and interactive training, including methods such as role-playing exercises or inviting members of the disabled community to participate in training sessions, to address the issues identified. This method emphasizes the need for continuous education to build staff confidence and competence in serving guests with disabilities.

2.

Communication.

Effective communication between hotels and guests with disabilities is vital, particularly during the pre-arrival phase. Stonesifer and Kim proposed the introduction of ADA specialists within reservation centers to ensure that the specific needs of guests were communicated and met in advance. This strategy improves service and also reduces misunderstandings at check-in to ensure hotels better anticipate and accommodate guest requirements.

3.

Provide escorts and in-room orientation.

Escort services and personalized in-room orientations were identified as cost-effective strategies to enhance guest experiences. The provision of customized assistance based on specific disabilities allows hotels to address issues such as furniture accessibility, operational guidance for room features, and the use of safety equipment. This personalized method fosters comfort and confidence among guests upon arrival.

4.

Utilize cut-in room keys.

Stonesifer and Kim showed the value of user-friendly room key systems, such as cut-in keys or radio frequency identification (RFID) technology, to benefit all guests, including those with visual impairments. These innovations address a practical challenge often overlooked and show how small adjustments can significantly improve accessibility.

5.

Consult with guests with disabilities in hotel design.

Large-scale structural changes are not always feasible, but Stonesifer and Kim emphasize the importance of including guests with disabilities in the design and renovation of hotel properties. Consulting these individuals allows hoteliers to exceed the minimum standards required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and address specific concerns such as restroom maneuverability and the placement of accessibility features.

6.

Acknowledge diverse needs.

Stonesifer and Kim advocate for a flexible method that considers the unique needs of each guest and the specific constraints of individual properties due to the recognition of the diversity of disabilities. The concept of “reasonable accommodation” shows the need for a compromise between guests and hoteliers to ensure positive experiences within practical and financial limitations.

This six-component framework offers a comprehensive strategy for improving the hospitality experience of guests with disabilities while balancing operational challenges. The incorporation of the elements allows hotels to foster a more inclusive and supportive environment in line with the broader goals of accessibility and customer satisfaction.

3. Materials and Methods

Qualitative study is differentiated by its immersion in the natural world, utilization of multiple interactive methods, emphasis on context, emergent design, and interpretive nature. Our methodological shift towards qualitative methods was influenced by the current focus of tourism studies on cultural and social topics, as well as the interdisciplinary nature of the field [27,28].

The attention being paid to studies on tourism has led to an increase in the acceptance of qualitative methods as a more effective way to address questions of understanding and meaning from the turn of the millennium. This method was inspired by the cultural and social sciences, such as anthropology and sociology, with the aim of exploring and searching for meaning or developing an understanding through empirical studies, generating rich descriptions, or collecting material that can become subject to interpretation. The qualitative method focuses on avoiding generalizations, grand claims, and reductions. It is often characterized by a high level of reflectivity and sensitivity to power relations and ambiguity [29].

3.1. Data Collection Methods

Primary and secondary data were collected in this study. The primary aspect was achieved through the following method:

• Observation: Field observations were used to collect both oral and written information directly from the local community about the activities conducted in relation to the socio-cultural aspects potentially supporting participation in tourism development.
• Interview: Unstructured interviews were conducted to formally ask in-depth questions to participants, using appropriate guidelines to understand their views, life experiences, and expressions without feeling interrogated.
• Documentation: Several observations were inventoried, described, and photographed, concerning events considered important related to solving study problems.

3.2. Selection of the Participants

The participants selected for interviews comprised staff from different hotels across East Java, Indonesia. The selection process was based on several steps to ensure diversity and representativeness within the sample. Firstly, a list of hotels in the East Java region was compiled with due consideration for factors such as location, size, and reputation. A purposive sampling method was later used to select hotels that reflected a range of characteristics, including different star ratings, types of accommodation, and geographical locations within East Java. The identification of the hotels was followed by efforts to make direct contact in order to propose the study and request participation. Upon confirmation of the willingness to participate, discussions were held with hotel management to determine the appropriate staff members to be included in the interviews. This consideration was based on some departments within the hotels, such as the front office, housekeeping, food and beverage, and management, to gather insights from different perspectives within the hospitality industry. The participants were generally selected in order to provide the rich and diverse dataset needed to ensure a thorough exploration of the study objectives and facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the topic under investigation. A total of 20 interview sessions were conducted with the representatives of 20 hotels in East Java, Indonesia. Moreover, the privacy of the participants and companies was protected by anonymizing their names. The characteristics of the participants are detailed in

Table 1. Participant Profile.

No	Pseudonym	Hotel	Position	Department
1.	Sinta	Hotel A	Staff	Front Office
2.	Amir	Hotel B	Staff	Management
3.	Raihan	Hotel C	Staff	Food and Beverage
4.	Putri	Hotel D	Staff	Housekeeping
5.	Nana	Hotel E	Staff	Front Office
6.	Kevin	Hotel F	Staff	Front Office
7.	Sela	Hotel G	Staff	HRD
8.	Rosa	Hotel H	Staff	Food and Beverage
9.	Rhey	Hotel I	Manager	Learning and Development
10.	Bam	Hotel J	Manager	Kitchen
11.	Adim	Hotel K	Assistant Manager	HRD
12.	Alan	Hotel L	Staff	HRD
13.	Davies	Hotel M	Manager	Service
14	Ocha	Hotel N	Manager	HRD
15.	Maya	Hotel O	Manager	HRD
16.	Rosa	Hotel P	Staff	Food and Beverage
17.	Mira	Hotel Q	Manager	Learning and Development
18.	Anton	Hotel R	Manager	GM
19.	Neni	Hotel S	Manager	Marketing
20.	Eka	Hotel T	Manager	HRD

.

3.3. Data Coding and Analysis

The data collection process was followed by verbatim transcription to ensure accuracy. Moreover, thematic analysis was used to identify patterns and themes within the data [27], based on the following six-phase framework:

• Familiarization with the data: The transcripts were read multiple times to gain an overall understanding of the responses.
• Generation of initial codes: Key phrases and significant statements were marked and assigned initial descriptive codes.
• Search for themes: Related codes were grouped into potential themes based on recurring topics and patterns.
• Review of themes: The themes were refined and adjusted through comparison with the coded data to ensure coherence.
• Defining and naming themes: The themes were clearly defined and named based on their contribution to addressing the study objectives.
• Writing the report: The final themes were contextualized within the study framework through illustrative quotes from the participants.

The NVivo software v15.0 was utilized to facilitate systematic data coding and theme identification to ensure consistency and transparency in the analysis. Moreover, inter-coder reliability checks were conducted by engaging an independent scholar to review a subset of the transcripts and coding framework. Discrepancies were discussed and resolved to enhance the reliability of the results.

The implementation of a rigorous data analysis process ensured a comprehensive understanding of the study topic. This further allowed for in-depth insights into the socio-cultural dimensions of tourism development in East Java.

4. Results and Discussions

4.1. Results

The results showed varying levels of readiness among hotels to address the needs of guests with disabilities. For example, Hotels A and B exhibited some initiatives but did not achieve full compliance with accessibility standards. A representative from Hotel A mentioned that wheelchairs were provided but dedicated toilets for individuals with disabilities remained insufficiently available.

“We already have wheelchairs for disabled visitors behind the front office area. The purpose of these wheelchairs is to assist visitors with special needs. For other services, we haven’t implemented them yet, but my colleagues in the operational department are quite knowledgeable and aware of disability issues. If there are guests with special needs, they will be responsive and quick to assist.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel A)

Hotel B faced similar challenges with the absence of dedicated toilets, but other needs such as assisting guests with special requirements had been addressed. This could be observed from the following statement:

“The facilities in the hotel do not include toilets specifically for disabled individuals. However, the existing facilities are sufficient, even though they are public toilets. They are also adequate for disabled individuals.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel B)

Hotels C, D, E, G, and H showed a higher level of readiness regarding physical accessibility. Facilities such as special rooms and toilets for disabled individuals were provided, in addition to different physical accessibility aids, such as canes and wheelchairs.

“We provide several rooms specifically designated for individuals with disabilities, aimed at facilitating their use of these rooms. For example, these rooms are equipped with emergency call buttons located next to the bed for easy access in times of need. Additionally, there are handrails provided to assist with mobility, allowing for easy navigation within the room or reaching for items. Wheelchair accessibility is also ensured, and in the bathroom, there are shower seats available. Furthermore, we offer loan services for canes and wheelchairs.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel D)

The varying levels of accessibility were often shaped by the perceived urgency of implementing such facilities. A hotel manager expressed that accessibility features were considered less of a priority due to low demand:

“The presence of facilities, in our view, is not urgently needed…not many guests have asked for them so far. For now, having a disability-friendly toilet already covers everything. Disability-friendly rooms are actually part of the checklist for star ratings. A four-star hotel is required to have at least one feature, whether it’s a ramp or a room. The absence of any of these leads to a reduction in our score.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel M)

“In this hotel, we do have the facilities for the disabled. However, disabled guests are quite rare, and if they come, they already come with their caregiver. We don’t need to serve them in a special way because they are well looked after by their family members or caregivers.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel S)

The phrase “not urgently needed” reflects the perception that disability facilities are not yet a pressing requirement for hotels. This mindset suggests a reactive method to accessibility which is driven more by compliance with star-rating criteria than by proactive inclusivity. Moreover, Hotels K and L expressed that addressing the needs of individuals with disabilities in their establishments was not a priority. This perspective is in line with their belief that providing such facilities is not a mandatory requirement for hotels. This trend can be observed in the response of one participant, which is stated as follows:

“No, no... we don’t have to. It’s optional whether we choose to provide facilities or cater to disability needs. At the moment, we don’t see it as necessary.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel K)

An intriguing viewpoint was shared by Hotel L, which emphasized the need to “anticipate” rather than proactively accommodate. This perspective is reflected in the following remark:

“We just need to anticipate. We provide facilities primarily to meet the standards of a star-rated hotel and to be prepared in case we have a guest with a disability. It’s more about anticipation than urgency.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel L)

The frequently mentioned phrase “...we don’t have to” reflects the deliberate choice of the hotels not to provide facilities or address the needs of individuals with disabilities. The phrase “we just anticipate” suggests that there is some willingness on the part of the hotels, but the main objective is not to fully meet those needs.

4.1.1. Evaluating and Expanding Sensitivity Training Programs

The development and refinement of sensitivity training programs are very important for improving hospitality services for guests with disabilities. This is because sensitivity training provides staff with the awareness and skills necessary to meet diverse guest needs in order to foster inclusivity. However, the results showed that most hotels did not have dedicated training programs for serving disabled guests. It was observed that most guests were treated similarly to others by adhering to standard service protocols. Some managers reported that serving disabled guests required heightened attentiveness, but there was no specialized training. For example, Hotel A implemented general awareness initiatives for its staff but lacked structured programs. Hotel B similarly emphasized the importance of attentive service within the framework of its standard operating procedures.

“We don’t have any specific training for handling disabled guests, but we apply the same excellent service standards for everyone. It’s more about being alert and adapting as needed.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel B)

Hotels C, D, E, and F also echoed this sentiment, with staff relying on existing service standards and their judgment to cater to the unique needs of disabled guests.

“Serving disabled guests is part of our job, but there’s no specific training. We just follow the same protocol and adjust when necessary.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel D)

This trend shows some recognition of the need to increase staff awareness and sensitivity despite the lack of formalized training.

“While we don’t have formal programs, we encourage our staff to be more observant and empathetic, especially when interacting with guests with special needs.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel F)

The absence of structured training contrasts with the framework proposed by Stonesifer and Kim, which identifies the importance of specialized sensitivity programs for enhancing guest satisfaction. Hotels can address this gap by investing in dedicated training initiatives to ensure that staff are well-equipped to meet the unique requirements of serving disabled guests. The adoption of these measures can move the hospitality industry closer to the development of an environment that genuinely supports inclusivity and accessibility for all.

4.1.2. Communication

Effective communication is critical in ensuring the satisfaction of guests with disabilities, particularly during the pre-arrival phase. Stonesifer and Kim emphasized the importance of implementing ADA specialists within reservation centers to facilitate clear communication and ensure that the unique needs of disabled guests are identified and met in advance. This proactive method minimizes misunderstandings during check-in and allows hotels to better prepare for guest arrivals.

Our field results showed the varying levels of communication strategies used by hotels. For example, Hotel A focused on providing extra attention at the front office and public areas to address guest needs directly upon arrival.

“We always ask guests during check-in if they have any special requirements. If a guest mentions a need, such as a wheelchair assistant or a specific type of room, we ensure it is handled promptly by our staff.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel A)

Hotel B emphasized a readiness-to-assist mindset but lacked formalized communication protocols. This can be observed in the following response from their representative:

“Our team is trained to respond quickly to any issues that arise, but sometimes, we only find out about the specific needs of guests when they arrive. It would help if we had a system to gather this information earlier.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel B)

Hotels C, D, and E have implemented training programs that equip their staff with communication skills specifically customized to understanding and addressing the needs of disabled guests. For example, Hotel D ensured that reception staff proactively inquired about special requirements during reservations:

“We always ask guests at the time of booking if there are any accessibility needs. This allows us to prepare the room with facilities such as handrails, shower seats, or wheelchairs in advance.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel D)

Hotel F acknowledged challenges in communication, particularly when accommodating guests with more complex disabilities. The hotel management recognized the need for further investment in staff training to address these gaps effectively. A spokesperson from Hotel F admitted the following:

“We sometimes face difficulties understanding the exact requirements of our disabled guests, especially those with hearing or speech impairments. Training staff to handle these situations better is something we are working on.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel F)

Hotels J and K implemented a more structured method by combining specialized training with advanced communication tools. For example, Hotel J has introduced a pre-arrival form that enables guests to specify their needs in detail:

“Our reservation process includes a form where guests can inform us of their specific requirements, such as room modifications or additional equipment. This ensures that everything is ready before they arrive.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel J)

The results showed the importance of adopting communication strategies in line with the framework proposed by Stonesifer and Kim. These efforts to bridge the communication gap allow hotels to improve guest satisfaction and foster a reputation for inclusivity and care.

4.1.3. Escort Services and In-Room Orientation

Stonesifer and Kim showed the value of providing escort services and in-room orientation as cost-effective strategies to enhance guest satisfaction. These methods address practical needs such as furniture accessibility, guidance on room features, and safety equipment use. Moreover, personalized assistance ensures that guests feel comfortable and confident during their stay, particularly those with specific disabilities.

The results from the field confirmed the relevance of this theory by showcasing varying implementations across hotels. For instance, Hotel C assigned front office staff to accompany guests with disabilities to their rooms in order to ensure the layout and available amenities were understood.

“We always escort guests with disabilities to their rooms. We demonstrate how to use features like emergency call buttons, adjust the bed height, and operate the TV remote. It is about making sure they feel at ease and safe.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel C)

Hotel E used a similar strategy, but with less emphasis on formal orientation. The method focused on providing basic assistance upon request. This was confirmed by the response of their representative:

“If a guest with disabilities needs help, we accompany them to the room and ensure they are settled. We don’t have a specific orientation program, but we address any immediate questions or concerns they might have.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel E)

Hotels D and H had institutionalized this service by training staff to proactively offer in-room orientations customized to different disabilities. For example, Hotel D provided thorough demonstrations of room features for visually impaired guests. A representative explained the following:

“For visually impaired guests, we walk them through the room, describing the location of furniture and important features such as light switches and bathroom facilities. We also demonstrate the use of emergency equipment and offer follow-up assistance as needed.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel D)

These results reinforced the assertion of Stonesifer and Kim that personalized escort services and in-room orientations were cost-effective and could also significantly enhance the comfort and confidence of guests with disabilities. The adoption of these strategies allows hotels to provide a welcoming and inclusive environment that caters to diverse guest needs. These are necessary in order to set a new standard for accessibility in the hospitality industry.

4.1.4. User-Friendly Room Key Systems

Stonesifer and Kim showed the importance of accessible room key systems, such as cut-in keys or RFID technology, to accommodate guests with disabilities, particularly those with visual impairments. These innovative solutions address practical barriers and show how minor technological improvements can significantly enhance inclusivity.

The results from the field showed that most star-rated hotels had adopted RFID technology for their room access systems. This advancement allows guests to unlock doors effortlessly by tapping the RFID key near a sensor in order to eliminate the challenges associated with traditional keycards. The benefit was identified in the response of a representative from Hotel C:

“Our RFID system is designed to be straightforward. Guests simply need to bring the card close to the door’s sensor, and it unlocks. This feature is particularly appreciated by visually impaired guests, as they don’t need to align the card with a slot or swipe it multiple times.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel C)

Several local hotels rely on conventional keycards or mechanical keys, which are less accessible for guests with disabilities. A manager at Hotel J shared the following:

“We still use regular keycards that guests need to insert into the slot. While it works for most guests, we understand it can be challenging for those with visual impairments. Unfortunately, upgrading to RFID is costly, and for now, our staff assists these guests directly when needed.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel J)

Hotel A uses traditional keycards but provides additional support to guests with disabilities. This was identified by their spokesperson:

“Although we haven’t switched to RFID yet, our staff is always available to help guests with visual impairment access their rooms. We’re exploring upgrades but haven’t implemented them due to budget constraints.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel A)

The results showed a clear divide between technological adoption in star-rated and local hotels. Star-rated hotels increasingly embrace RFID systems for ease and inclusivity, but several local hotels face resource limitations and continue to rely on traditional methods. Bridging this gap would require investments and initiatives to make accessibility technology more affordable and widespread, ensuring an inclusive experience for all travelers.

4.1.5. Consulting with Guests with Disabilities in Hotel Design

Stonesifer and Kim emphasized the importance of including guests with disabilities in the design and renovation of hotel properties. This is necessary to ensure that hoteliers go beyond the minimum standards and address specific needs such as restroom maneuverability and the placement of accessibility features. However, results from the field showed a significant gap in the adoption of this method among hotels. Most participants reported that their disability-friendly facilities were designed primarily to comply with certification requirements for achieving a certain star rating, rather than through consultation with guests with disabilities.

“We rarely have disabled guests here. If they do come, they are usually accompanied by their families, so we allocate our budget to other priorities. Currently, we don’t have facilities specifically for disabled guests.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel I)

“We have a ramp at the entrance and a disability-friendly restroom, but we don’t have accessible rooms yet. There’s no directive requiring us to go in that direction, and we rarely have such guests.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel M)

Interestingly, several managers pointed out that government regulations around accessibility were often interpreted as recommendations rather than strict mandates. One manager commented the following:

“The guidelines are just suggestions, so we anticipate the needs of disabled guests by providing some facilities, but it’s not mandatory.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel J)

Even employees expressed similar sentiments:

“No, it’s not required. Certification standards don’t mandate us to provide facilities for disabled guests. So, for now, we don’t have those facilities.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel L)

These perspectives show a lack of emphasis on inclusive design beyond regulatory compliance. Some hotels provide accessible rooms, which are often treated as backup options to be made available only when other rooms are fully booked. This approach showed a profit-driven mindset rather than a commitment to inclusivity. Moreover, hotels argued that the scarcity of disabled guests justified the limited availability of specialized facilities. This was observed in the following response from one manager:

“Disabled guests typically arrive with their family or a caregiver, so their needs are already handled. There’s no pressing need for staff to provide extensive assistance.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel K)

Stonesifer and Kim advocated for guest participation in hotel design to enhance accessibility, but real-world practices showed a reliance on meeting minimum requirements driven by certification or government recommendations. A stronger emphasis on consultation and inclusive design could bridge the gap between compliance and true accessibility in order to foster a more welcoming environment for all guests.

4.1.6. Acknowledging Diverse Needs

Stonesifer and Kim identified the importance of recognizing the diversity of disabilities and advocated for a flexible method customized to the unique needs of each guest while considering the limitations of individual properties. The concept of “reasonable accommodation” emphasizes a balanced method that ensures guest satisfaction without imposing impractical demands on hotels. However, our field results suggested that most hotels implemented only basic facilities for guests with disabilities, often driven by regulatory requirements rather than a proactive acknowledgment of diverse needs. An example can be found in the following response from one manager:

“We try to accommodate, but we focus on general needs, such as ramps and wider doorways. It’s not possible to meet every individual requirement due to cost and space limitations.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel M)

Another interviewee shared the following:

“We had a guest who requested specific modifications to their room, such as moving furniture. We adjusted as much as possible, but there’s a limit to what we can do in terms of structural changes.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel C)

Hotels frequently rely on “on-the-spot adjustments” to cater to unique requests. This was observed in the following response from one staff member:

“When a guest with disabilities checks in, we assess their needs at that moment. For example, if they need extra space, we rearrange the furniture in their room. We try to be flexible, but our resources are limited.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel D)

The results showed that hotels had attempted to address diverse needs but that the extent of accommodations often depended on the resources available and the perceived frequency of such requests. This was observed in the following explanation from one manager:

“We don’t have many disabled guests staying with us, so investing heavily in specialized facilities is difficult to justify. Instead, we handle requests case by case.”

(Spokesperson from Hotel J)

The trend showed that, although Stonesifer and Kim emphasized the need for a connection between flexibility, “reasonable accommodation”, and practices, these results show a reactive rather than proactive approach. The hotels prioritized basic compliance and adjusted to specific needs only when necessary. This shows the need for broader awareness and investment in fostering inclusivity. Moreover, the key results from the interviews with several hotels are summarized in

Table 2. Summary of key results and observations.

Category	Results	Examples/Quotes
Sensitivity Training	- Most hotels lack structured sensitivity training programs for staff. - Training focuses on general service standards with minor adjustments.	- “We don’t have any specific training for handling disabled guests, but we apply the same excellent service standards for everyone.” (Hotel B) - “Serving disabled guests is part of our job, but there’s no specific training.” (Hotel D)
Communication	-Varying communication strategies are employed. - Star-rated hotels show better pre-arrival communication practices. - Local hotels face challenges in gathering guest information earlier.	- “We always ask guests at check-in if they have any special requirements.” (Hotel A) - “Our reservation process includes a form where guests can inform us of their specific requirements.” (Hotel J)
Escort Services/In-Room Orientation	- Cost-effective strategies such as escort services and in-room orientations are underutilized. - Implementation varies widely across hotels.	- “We always escort guests with disabilities to their rooms and demonstrate how to use room features.” (Hotel C) - “If a guest needs help, we accompany them to the room but don’t have a specific program.” (Hotel E)
User-Friendly Room Key Systems	- Star-rated hotels have increasingly adopted RFID technology. - Local hotels primarily rely on traditional keycards.	- “Our RFID system is particularly appreciated by visually impaired guests.” (Hotel C) - “We still use regular keycards but assist guests with disabilities when needed.” (Hotel J)
Inclusive Hotel Design	- Most hotels design facilities to meet certification requirements, not based on guest feedback. - Accessibility features are often treated as secondary.	- “We rarely have disabled guests here, so we allocate our budget to other priorities.” (Hotel I) - “Our ramp and restroom meet guidelines, but accessible rooms are not available.” (Hotel M)
Acknowledging Diverse Needs	- Hotels provide basic facilities but rely on on-the-spot adjustments for specific guest requests. - Investments depend on the perceived demand for accessibility features.	- “We try to accommodate general needs, but meeting every individual requirement is challenging.” (Hotel M) - “When a guest checks in, we assess and adjust as needed.” (Hotel D)

.

4.2. Discussion

Indonesia has introduced several legal measures to enhance accessibility and inclusivity in the hospitality sector. For example, Law No. 8 of 2016 focuses on the rights of individuals with disabilities by ensuring equal opportunities through accessibility, reasonable accommodations, and assistive devices. This law recognizes different types of disabilities and emphasizes the need for structural and service-based improvements to support inclusive tourism. Law No. 25 of 2009 on public services also reinforces the responsibility of the government to ensure that there are accessible public services. Article 29 specifically mandates the provision of facilities that enable individuals with disabilities to access services without discrimination. This regulation emphasizes a broader commitment to inclusivity which extends beyond tourism to essential public services that affect everyday life.

Infrastructure accessibility is another legal priority, as observed in Government Regulation No. 16 of 2021 which implements aspects of Law No. 28 of 2002 on building development and requires new and existing buildings to incorporate accessible features. These include physical adaptations such as ramps, elevators, and other supportive infrastructure to ensure usability for all individuals, particularly those with disabilities.

This commitment is further strengthened by Law No. 19 of 2011, which relates policies in Indonesia to the CRPD. This law obligates the government to establish facilities and services that promote accessibility in order to reinforce international standards of inclusivity. However, despite these legal frameworks, significant gaps remain between policy formulation and practical implementation. Several hospitality providers struggle to comply with accessibility requirements due to weak regulatory enforcement and insufficient monitoring mechanisms. Previous studies showed the existence of accessibility laws but a lack of consistent enforcement, which subsequently led to disparities in service quality across different establishments. The gaps between legal provisions and actual implementation show the need for stronger oversight and enforcement strategies.

As shown in

Table 3. Regulations regarding disability inclusivity in Indonesian hospitality services.

Regulation	Year	About
Law No. 25	2009	Public Services
Law No. 19	2011	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
Law No. 8	2016	Persons with Disabilities
Government Regulation (PP) Number 16	2021	Buildings Development

, the key regulations regarding disability inclusivity in Indonesian hospitality services include several pivotal laws and regulations that focus on accessibility and the rights of individuals with disabilities.

The hospitality industry faces significant challenges in implementing inclusive practices, despite legislative efforts. Previous studies showed that some hotels have already introduced specialized staff training to better accommodate guests with disabilities but that several others continued to limit the full usage of inclusive service models. Moreover, staff training was identified as a pivotal factor in enhancing service quality for disabled guests, and trained personnel exhibited greater responsiveness and empathy [30]. This trend was in line with results that showed the ability of ongoing education to foster awareness and subsequently enable hotels to address the diverse needs of guests effectively.

The framework developed by Stonesifer and Kim, which offers strategies to improve hospitality experiences for disabled guests, remains underutilized. The results of this study showed that several hospitality providers in Indonesia perceived accessibility improvement as a secondary priority rather than an integral component of their service model. Furthermore, the weak connection between legal mandates and practical implementation results in inconsistent accessibility standards across different establishments. It was observed that some hotels complied with basic legal requirements while others failed to meet even minimum accessibility expectations due to a lack of incentives and enforcement mechanisms. This trend shows the need to develop an explanatory model that integrates the results with the Stonesifer and Kim framework to provide a structured method to bridge the gap between policy and practice [31]. These results were in line with previous studies that showed the inability of several destinations and establishments to provide essential facilities [32]. Some of the key themes identified in relation to studies on tourism experiences among individuals with disabilities include unaccommodated needs such as the absence of guiding blocks, seats, disability-friendly language in terms of directions on wheelchair paths, tour guides for disability groups, and the suitability of roads for mobility [12]. Therefore, individuals with disabilities are considered one of the most marginalized groups in the tourism sector [11,33].

The reluctance identified further shows broader service quality issues within the industry. The SERVQUAL model, developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry, provides a framework to evaluate hospitality services through five dimensions [22]. Tangibility, which focuses on physical facilities, and equipment were observed to be inadequate in several establishments due to the consistent absence of essential accessibility features such as ramps and tactile guidance systems. The reliability or consistent delivery of promised services was also compromised when accessibility features were poorly maintained or unavailable. Moreover, responsiveness, which is explained as the willingness of staff to assist guests, was often insufficient due to limited training on disability-related needs. Assurance focuses on staff knowledge and courtesy and was found to be weak, leading to uncertainty among disabled travelers regarding the support to be received. Finally, empathy reflects individualized attention to guests and was observed to be lacking because accessibility considerations were secondary for several service providers [23].

The application of the SERVQUAL model to accessibility services allowed this study to identify key service gaps directly impacting the experiences of disabled travelers. Some establishments had made efforts to enhance accessibility, but the results showed that these initiatives often lacked consistency and sustainability. This was observed in the qualitative data showing that guests with disabilities frequently encountered barriers in both physical infrastructure and service delivery. This trend reinforces the need for a comprehensive model that integrates both legal requirements and service quality dimensions. Therefore, a refined framework that combines SERVQUAL with the Stonesifer and Kim model is proposed to provide a more contextually relevant method for accessibility in Indonesian hospitality services.

Financial constraints present a major barrier to developing accessible tourism infrastructure. This shows the need for substantial funding for investments in wheelchair-accessible pathways, tactile guidance systems for visually impaired travelers, and specialized accommodations. Several stakeholders perceived the costs of these as an additional financial burden rather than a long-term investment in inclusivity. This short-term financial mindset was particularly evident in businesses that prioritized immediate profitability over sustainable and accessible development. Furthermore, concerns about return on investment contributed to the reluctance to allocate resources for accessibility initiatives because some industry players believed that the accessible tourism market was niche and could not generate immediate financial gains. This perspective does not consider the broader economic potential of inclusive tourism or the ethical and legal obligations of ensuring accessibility for all individuals.

The efforts to address these financial barriers require collaboration between multiple stakeholders, including government agencies, private sector players, and civil society organizations. Kim, Woo, and Uysal [32] confirmed that partnership between stakeholders was crucial in mitigating economic challenges and fostering sustainable investment in accessible tourism. Government incentives, such as tax breaks or grants, can also motivate businesses to integrate accessibility features into their infrastructure, while collaborations with advocacy groups are capable of assisting in raising awareness about the long-term advantages of inclusive tourism. Moreover, hospitality providers can benefit from adopting a broader perspective on accessibility by recognizing the concept as a compliance requirement and a strategic advantage to enhance customer satisfaction and brand reputation.

These financial and operational challenges are further reflected in the broader framework of inclusivity in the hospitality industry. Figure 2 outlines the Challenges in Inclusive Practice Hospitality Framework and shows how economic constraints intersect with other barriers to accessibility to reinforce the need for integrated and systematic solutions. Accessibility needs to be considered by stakeholders within the wider context of inclusive tourism policies, industry best practices, and consumer expectations rather than as an isolated issue. This is because a more holistic method of accessibility, supported by coordinated efforts from public and private actors, can assist in bridging the gap between policy intentions and actual implementation. The process can further ensure that accessibility is not merely an aspirational goal but a fundamental component of tourism development.

Collaboration in the hospitality sector extends beyond economic benefits because it is in line with international frameworks such as the CRPD and Indonesia’s Law No. 8/2016. The necessity of a collective method has been reported in studies such as that of Blichfeldt and Nicolaisen [33], which emphasized the need for all stakeholders to bear responsibility for ensuring accessibility in tourism. The establishment of inclusive environments fosters trust among tourists with disabilities, thereby enhancing the reputation of the industry and contributing to its long-term economic sustainability. However, achieving meaningful inclusivity requires more than policy acknowledgment, it demands strategic implementation supported by clear regulations and industry-wide commitment. Despite legal frameworks mandating accessibility, implementation gaps remain a persistent challenge that necessitates a stronger focus on regulatory compliance, infrastructure development, and service quality improvements.

Several planning and design strategies have been identified as essential in addressing accessibility barriers within the hospitality sector. Infrastructure modifications, such as wheelchair-accessible pathways, tactile guides for the visually impaired, handrails along corridors, wheelchair-friendly bathrooms, and specialized lifts, have been proposed to enhance accessibility for tourists with disabilities [34,35,36,37,38,39]. These adjustments address fundamental issues related to mobility constraints and sensory impairments to ensure that built environments accommodate diverse needs. Equally critical is comprehensive staff training to improve service delivery to ensure that hospitality professionals are equipped with the necessary skills to assist disabled tourists effectively. Some establishments have taken progressive steps toward accessibility, but the inconsistencies in adoption show the need for an industry-wide shift in perspective—one that regards inclusivity as an operational necessity rather than an optional enhancement.

The efforts to address disparities in law enforcement require reinforcing regulatory frameworks and implementing stricter compliance measures. This is because the weak enforcement of accessibility laws has been identified as a primary obstacle to achieving industry-wide inclusivity. Moreover, strengthening collaborations between governmental bodies, private sector stakeholders, and non-governmental organizations is essential for establishing a more coherent and standardized method for accessibility compliance. The need to ensure that all hospitality establishments adhere to legal mandates also requires continuous monitoring, periodic evaluations, and the imposition of penalties for non-compliance. These measures can motivate accountability and propel businesses to integrate accessibility standards into their operational models rather than treating them as regulatory burdens. Furthermore, the growing role of the sharing economy in tourism provides additional opportunities for accessibility integration. Rodrigues et al. [39] and Fundeanu [37] suggested that businesses operating within this sector should prioritize inclusive design and services to expand their market reach and work in line with global accessibility standards. Progress has been observed in the selected establishments, but a comprehensive and structured method is necessary to ensure inclusivity becomes an ingrained principle within the hospitality industry rather than a selective practice.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the Indonesian tourism industry is gradually embracing accessible and barrier-free tourism to ensure inclusive experiences for all travelers, including those with disabilities. However, previous studies showed significant gaps in the implementation of inclusive practices. It was observed that the components outlined in the Stonesifer and Kim framework designed to enhance hospitality experiences for disabled guests were not fully reflected in the management or service delivery at the hotels studied. Accessibility features were often considered optional rather than mandatory, with some establishments only meeting the minimum requirements for star categorization. The lack of comprehensive staff training further aggravated these challenges because employees were not properly equipped to understand or address the needs of disabled guests. Economic factors, such as the high costs associated with specialized infrastructure and the relatively low number of disabled guests, contributed to the reluctance to prioritize inclusivity. These issues showed a broader disconnect in the commitment of the industry to universal accessibility.

The Parasuraman et al. framework applied to evaluate service quality through dimensions such as tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy was not fully realized. This was because the physical facilities, responsiveness, and empathy—needed to inspire trust and provide personalized attention—were often insufficient, reflecting a gap in service quality that undermined efforts to provide meaningful and equitable experiences for all guests. The field results were not fully in line with the Stonesifer and Kim framework which emphasized a more holistic method of inclusive service. The process led to a key novelty, which was the importance of collaboration with government bodies and the enforcement of stricter regulations as crucial elements in achieving effective inclusivity. The industry needs to shift from a transactional approach to embracing inclusivity as a core value to achieve the integration of universal design principles and foster collaborative strategies to meet the needs of diverse travelers.

The results of this study were limited by several factors. The first was the focus on only the East Java Province without covering other regions of Indonesia. Second, it was limited to hotels that primarily catered to domestic tourists, meaning that the results might differ for international travelers. Third, the conclusions drawn should be considered within the context of the study, which was based on 20 hotels in East Java.

This study provided a meaningful contribution by illuminating how hospitality providers in a developing country context engage with the principles of inclusive service. By bridging the gap between theoretical frameworks and real-world practice, it emphasized the importance of embedding inclusivity into core business strategies—not merely as a compliance measure, but as a value-driven concept in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Moreover, its novelty was in the identification of collaborative governance and regulatory enforcement as critical drivers of change. For policymakers, industry leaders, and scholars, these insights emphasize the urgency of rethinking tourism models to ensure the that diverse needs of all travelers are accommodated. Future studies should build upon this foundation to develop robust theoretical models that capture the growing dynamics of inclusivity in global tourism.