The Impact of the Perception of Leisure on Recreational and Tourism Spaces in an Urban Area

Abstract

The purpose of the present paper is to attempt to identify relations between the changing perception of leisure and the creation of tourism and recreational spaces in urban areas. The authors focus in particular on changes associated with the so-called ‘third wave’ (T offler 2001), time compression (N iezgoda 2017), and departure from synchronization. These considerations are illustrated by an analysis of the recreational activity of Szczecin residents and of tourists, and attempt identifying the relations between recreational space and tourism space. With the constant compression of leisure time, tourism activities become more similar to the leisure activities of residents, which means both types occur in the same environment. Urban recreational and tourism spaces overlap in a way that makes it impossible to separate them, but still allows the distinction of certain sub-spaces where either tourism or recreational behavior prevails.

Full text

e-ISSN 2080-6922
DOI: 10.2478/tour-2018-0006 ISSN 0867-5856
Tourism /Turyzm 2018, 28/1
Beata Meyer
University of Szczecin
Faculty of Management and Service Economics
Department of Service Marketing
beata.meyer@wzieu.pl
Agnieszka Niezgoda
Poznan University of Economics and Business,
Faculty of International Business and Economics
Department of Tourism
agnieszka.niezgoda@ue.poznan.pl
THE IMPACT OF THE PERCEPTION OF LEISURE ON RECREATIONAL
AND TOURISM SPACES IN AN URBAN AREA
Abstract: The purpose of the present paper is to attempt to identify relations between the changing perception of leisure and the
creation of tourism and recreational spaces in urban areas. The authors focus in particular on changes associated with the so-called
‘third wave’ (T
OFFLER
2001), time compression (N
IEZGODA
2017), and departure from synchronization. These considerations are
illustrated by an analysis of the recreational activity of Szczecin residents and of tourists, and attempt identifying the relations
between recreational space and tourism space. With the constant compression of leisure time, tourism activities become more similar
to the leisure activities of residents, which means both types occur in the same environment. Urban recreational and tourism spaces
overlap in a way that makes it impossible to separate them, but still allows the distinction of certain sub-spaces where either tourism
or recreational behavior prevails.
Keywords: leisure, tourism space, recreational space.
1. BACKGROUND
The existence of leisure time is considered a pre-
requisite for participation in recreation and tourism.
However, the impact of leisure time on participation
can be analyzed more broadly. It is associated with the
changes occurring in time organisation and divisions,
a departure from synchronization (i.e. blurring of
differences between work and leisure time – T
OFFLER
2001), and time compression (C
ZAJA
2011, G
OŁEMBSKI
,
N
IEZGODA
2012, N
IEZGODA
2017). On the other hand,
participation in recreation is increasingly common and
linked to the emergence of new recreational activities
and their associated spaces as well. Diverse leisure
opportunities, and the broad spectrum of services
offered, mean that recreational and tourism spaces
increasingly overlap.
Due to these processes, the relation between leisure
time and recreational activity should be analyzed more
broadly, instead of simply viewing leisure time as
a traditional prerequisite for participation in recreation.
The use of time and its value for individuals parti-
cipating in various forms of tourism and recreation,
contributes to dynamic changes in tourism and recre-
ational spaces, and to their growing common aspects.
The purpose of the article is to attempt to identify
relations between the changing perception of leisure
and the creation of tourism and recreational spaces
in urban areas. The authors focus in particular on
changes associated with the so-called ‘third wave’
(T
OFFLER
2001), time compression and departure from
synchronization. The paper proposes a thesis that
processes associated with common tourism and
recreational spaces may result from widespread
changes in the role and perception of leisure in
modern society. Selected theoretical aspects of the
paper have been illustrated by the results of a pilot
study concerning the recreational behavior of the
inhabitants of Szczecin and tourists visiting the city.
This study was conducted as a part of a project titled
‘Miasto jako obszar aktywności turystycznej i rekreacyjnej
mieszkańców, na przykładzie Szczecina’ [The city as a space

48 Tourism /Turyzm 2018, 28/1
for the recreational activities of its residents and for
tourists: as exemplified by Szczecin], undertaken
between 2012 and 2017 by researchers from the
Tourism and Health Resort Economics Workshop at
the Department of Tourism Management, Faculty
of Management and Service Economics, University of
Szczecin. In the study, a diagnostic survey was under-
taken in a randomly selected sample of 390 Szczecin
residents (the population of Szczecin at the time was
408,172) and 248 visitors to Szczecin (between June and
September 2015).
2. LEISURE – NATURE
AND DEFINITION
The perception of time and ways of measuring and
classifying it, including the division into work and leisure
(also termed ‘free time’), have been affected by civili-
zational changes, including in particular the develop-
ment of a capitalist economy. Views on leisure have
changed: Veblen considered it to be an attribute of the
so-called ‘leisure class’, while puritan ethics viewed
‘wasting time’ as a transgression (W
HITROW
2004, p. 239).
The capitalist system of work forced a clear separa-
tion of work and leisure; while 19
th
-century social
processes led to the emergence of legally guaranteed
free time. Therefore, certain traditional behaviors and
rituals associated with leisure are deep-rooted in
the social consciousness of the 21
st
century (B
OMBOL
2008, p. 7).
Leisure time is commonly defined in opposition to
working time – as a domain of pleasure, voluntary
activity, and freedom. This manner of defining leisure
time means that a list of activities undertaken cannot
be developed (M
YŚLIWSKA
2011, p. 136). As stated by
S. C
ZAJA
(2011, p. 229), relations between work and
leisure can be defined in a variety of ways. Some
researchers consider preparation for work to be the
primary function of leisure. In another approach,
leisure is viewed as a reward for the alienating effect
of work. A third approach places leisure in the context
of transforming work into ‘non-work’.
The approaches to leisure listed above mean that
only a combination of all these dimensions produces
definition: “leisure time is, therefore, time that a defini-
tion. M. B
OMBOL
(2005, p. 15) proposed the following
an individual uses to their own satisfaction through free
choice, filled with activities resulting from relatively
free internal or external circumstances. It is thus free
from any restriction.” However, in the modern world,
a distinction between entirely free activities and forced
ones is difficult. Relations between freedom to choose
activities and the will to undertake them become
complicated.
3. LEISURE TIME AS A PREREQUISITE
FOR RECREATION
Activity that is freely undertaken by a person in their
free time is commonly termed ‘recreation’. Changes
in the perception and use of leisure time (not only from
an individual, but also from social and economic
points of view) have triggered discussions on the
relations (and definitions) between leisure time and
recreation, often in association with tourism and sport,
see e.g. R. K
RAUS
(1971), J.A. P
ETERSON
and W.D. M
AR
-
TIN
(1985), A.J. V
EAL
(1992), L. M
EERAS
(2010), A.R. H
URD
& D.M. A
NDERSON
(2011), D.R. A
USTIN
& Y. L
EE
(2013),
A. G
ULAM
(2016). Similar debates on the scope of
terms such as leisure, recreation, and tourism are
also present in Polish literature. Still, the most
commonly cited definition is the one by Wolańska,
stating that “recreation comprises various activities that
are undertaken in one’s free time, voluntarily, for
pleasure, for the development of one’s personality,
or to restore and increase one’s psychological and
physical capacity” (Wolańska 1997 cit. from M
EYER
,
ed. 2015, p. 15). A similar definition has been pro-
posed by A. Kowalczyk, in which recreation includes
“any activity undertaken voluntarily with a view to
restoring one’s physical and psychological capacity,
specifically including participation in culture, games,
and sports, which takes place in time that is free from
school, work, or household activities” (K
OWALCZYK
2000). The definition by S. Tanaś is concise, but
contains the same main attributes, stating that recrea-
tion is “any form of regeneration of human capacities
by spending one’s free time in an active or passive
manner” (T
ANAŚ
2008). A comprehensive definition of
recreation, comprising its key aspects, has been
formulated by A. Dąbrowski: “all socially acceptable
forms of human activity taking place in one’s free
time; undertaken voluntarily, freely, and for pleasure;
which serve to restore and enhance one’s capacities,
enable playful, active, and diverse self-realization; and
are performed individually or in groups, or occur as
a global process” (D
ĄBROWSKI
,
ed. 2006).
The forms of activity selected are affected by
a number of factors, including age, one’s social and
economic standing, education, and residence. Ways of
spending one’s leisure time are strongly affected by
the social, civilizational, and economic environment of
the individual (B
OMBOL
2005, p. 15, B
ELLEZZA
, P
AHARIA
& K
EINAN
2017). An individual’s leisure behaviors
may demonstrate their social status or membership in
a group. Changes in leisure time may be used to analyze
changes in recreation and tourism, as these sectors are
involved in spending this time (N
IEZGODA
2014, N
IEZGO
-
DA
2017). D.G. R
EID
et al. (1993) attempt to indicate
links between the categories of leisure, recreation,

Articles 49
tourism, and other activities, but claim that their inter-
dependencies cannot be clearly demonstrated.
Changes in leisure may also be analyzed in associ-
ation with processes characteristic of civilizational shifts.
These include conspicuous consumption (B
ELLEZZA
,
P
AHARIA
& K
EINAN
2017), individualization (B
UTLER
2006, R
EICH
, P
ECHLANER
& H
OELZL
2006, N
IEZGODA
2017), and time compression (C
ZAJA
2011, G
OŁEMBSKI
& N
IEZGODA
2012, N
IEZGODA
2017).
Conspicuous consumption is typical for affluent
societies where the set of goods and services consumers
purchase may reflect their financial (and social) stand-
ing. Forms of recreation, and in particular tourism, may
become a synonym for luxury.
Individualization occurs in markets where consumers
can find goods and services matching their individual,
often unique, needs. One example of a market that caters
to individual needs is tourism, where consumers are able
to compose individual sets of services to buy.
Leisure time becomes a valuable resource for
individuals, as it provides satisfaction, and is evaluated
based on difference from working time. As stated by
J
UNG
(2011, p. 169), for the relatively affluent consumers
in OECD countries, an increase in consumption may
be hindered by a shortage of time for engaging in some
forms, rather than a shortage of purchasing power.
This prompts consumers to choose more time-effective
forms of activity. Those who earn more tend to have
less available leisure time (N
IEZGODA
2017). Therefore,
this time becomes increasingly valuable, and there is
a need for its optimal utilization. Time and space become
‘compressed’.
This entails a progressive decrease in the importance
of public space, and reduction of distance over time.
The phenomenon may be understood as a change in
the attributes of modern life, manifesting in increased
intensity of production and consumption within a unit
of time (C
ZAJA
2011, p. 227). Time loses its dimensions,
as communication (in its broadest sense) requires less
and less of it. Space loses its importance, as distances
lose their significance. Today’s elites, as well as tourists,
become less attached to specific territories, and increase-
ingly independent of limited socio-cultural and political
spaces, in a sense, they become extraterritorial (G
OŁEMB
-
SKI
& N
IEZGODA
2012). On the consumer’s side, time
compression manifests itself in the increased intensity
of production and consumption (i.e. of both processes
simultaneously) in a unit of time (N
IEZGODA
2017).
Another phenomenon associated with changes in
leisure time is the departure from so-called ‘synchroni-
zation’, resulting from the ‘third wave’ (T
OFFLER
2001).
This allows consumers to combine professional activity
with recreation and rest. Boundaries between leisure
and work begin to blur (K
ACHNIEWSKA
et al. 2012,
p. 144). One example could be a tourist using the
recreational services of a hotel while participating in
a conference.
Furthermore, using computers, or even phones, for
work increases the difficulty of distinguishing specific
activities classified as work or leisure (e.g. checking one’s
work-related and personal messages at the same time,
browsing the internet during breaks in working etc.).
In the context of changes affecting leisure, it is inter-
esting to look at the shaping and differentiation of recre-
ational space, and its relationship with tourism space.
Recreational space has not yet been clearly defined,
nor systematized in detail (as opposed to tourism
space, which has been defined, classified, and categor-
ized by many authors, including S. L
ISZEWSKI
(1995,
2013), A. K
OWALCZYK
(2014), M. W
IĘCKOWSKI
(2014),
B. W
ŁODARCZYK
(2014). The most commonly cited
definition is the one by M. Drzewiecki, defining recrea-
tional space as “a fragment of geographical space with
characteristics enabling and conducive to various forms
of leisure, where recreational processes of a socially
and spatially significant extent occur” (D
RZEWIECKI
1992, p. 17). According to S. Toczek-Werner, in
a (recreational) space used for recreational activities,
one can distinguish recreational activity centers (ful-
filling the expectations and needs of individuals who
prefer specific forms of activity e.g. fitness centers,
swimming pools, dance studios) and areas, that
enable recreation without restricting its form (e.g.
parks, squares, sports fields, playgrounds) (T
OCZEK
-
W
ERNER
2007).
For the purpose of the present paper, recreational
space is assumed to be any space where recreational ac-
tivities are undertaken. The nature of a given location
allows for distinguishing open (outdoor) and closed
(indoor) spaces, and for identifying spaces associated
with a specific type of recreational activity (e.g. swim-
ming, dancing, walking). Additionally, each space type
may be considered formal (where activities are organized
and/or provided for a charge) or informal (where
activities are undertaken individually and free of
charge)
1
.
Recreational space is most commonly viewed in the
context of activities undertaken by the residents of
a given area in their free time. However, in the case
of areas that are attractive for tourists, there may (and
does) exist some overlap between recreational space
(used for leisure by residents) and tourism space (used
for tourism and recreational activities by tourists). It
seems that due to the changes occurring in the percep-
tion and consumption of leisure time, despite the fact
that residents and tourists select their leisure activities
independently, the selected activities are analogous in
nature and undertaken within the same space. On the
one hand, this results from changes in the attitudes
and behaviors of residents who use the most attractive
parts of their place of residence for leisure, and also

50 Tourism /Turyzm 2018, 28/1
often combine their working and leisure time within
the same space. On the other hand, the behaviors of
tourists also change, as besides spending their time
actively, in an attractive environment, tourists wish
to experience the daily life of local residents (tourism
‘off the beaten track’).
4. RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY
OF RESIDENTS AND TOURISTS
IN SZCZECIN
The above considerations are illustrated by an analysis
of the recreational activity of Szczecin residents and
tourists, and an attempt at identifying the relation-
ships between recreational space and tourism space.
Szczecin has a large surface area (approx. 301 km
2
),
where green areas account for 17.54 % of the total, which,
combined with bodies of water (23.68%) and agricultural
land, gives 60.81% of the total area of the city (2016
report). This large share of green areas and bodies of
water has a strong impact on the character of the city
and creates favorable conditions for recreation. Enjoy-
ment of the natural environment is facilitated by the
constantly developing infrastructure (marinas, beaches,
forest clearings, educational trails, hiking trails, cycle
paths). Furthermore, the city has extensive facilities for
undertaking a variety of recreational activities. These
include buildings and infrastructure for recreational
sports, such as stadiums (12), sports grounds (231), in-
door swimming pools (8), marinas (12), tennis courts (7),
or outdoor gyms (14). Various businesses and institu-
tions use the city’s facilities to pursue various interests
e.g. sports clubs (273), gyms and fitness centers, dance
schools, community centers etc. Infrastructure for culture
and entertainment includes a concert hall (which hosted
436 events in 2016), cinemas (5), museums (7), and the-
aters (5). This concise presentation of potential recrea-
tional spaces in Szczecin does not constitute a detailed
inventory, but simply indicates some of the recreational
spaces and activities available.
Results of a study undertaken among Szczecin
residents indicate that most leisure time on weekdays
(1–2 hours) is available to young people (more than
half of respondents aged 18–30), while most people aged
41–50 declare they only have free time at weekends.
The most common activities undertaken include outdoor
recreation (75% of women and 55% of men), games of
skill (chess, cards, board games), and water sports
(approx. 30% of respondents); moreover, men often
pursue strength-based sports (35%), and women often
choose fitness activities (39%). The least common
activities include extreme sports and horse riding.
The vast majority (77%) arrange their leisure activities
themselves, while the remaining participate in organized
activities.
The outdoor recreational activities named included
walking (almost 50% claim several times per week),
cycling (13%), gardening (6%), and Nordic walking (3%).
Respondents jog (17%) several times a month and
engage in team sports (13%); use beaches (43%), ice rinks
(34%), and recreational grounds (32%), and attend public
events (31%) several times a year. The preferred locations
for outdoor activities include the Kasprowicza (48%) and
Jasne Błonia (39%) parks, the Wały Chrobrego embank-
ment (35%), and Puszcza Bukowa (24%) and Las Arkoński
(18%) forests.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents, mostly aged 25–30
(over 80%), declare they use sports and recreation
facilities (approx. 5% more men than women). More than
10% stated they use the following several times per
month: fitness centers (20%), swimming pools (18%),
saunas (14%), and gyms (14%). The least commonly
used facilities (several times per year, fewer than 10%
of respondents) are tennis and squash courts. As to
passive recreation, the preferred forms include attend-
ing cinemas (77% declare they go to the cinema several
times per year), and spending time with friends (40%
state they do this several times per month). As for daily
forms of recreation, the most common one is watching
television (45.4%). Over 12% of respondents play video
games or go shopping on a daily basis.
In 2015, Szczecin was visited by nearly 390,000
tourists, of whom 34% came from abroad, mainly from
Germany (43%) and the Nordic countries (Denmark,
Sweden, Norway). Study results indicate that main
activities of tourists during their stay in Szczecin in-
cluded participating in special events (82%) and cultural
events (52%)
2
. More than half of the respondents
engaged in sightseeing, approx. 48% enjoyed the green
areas, and approx. 45% went shopping. Foreign tourists
were less likely than domestic tourists to participate in
cultural events or to enjoy water and green areas, and
more likely to sightsee and participate in special events.
The sport and recreational infrastructure of the city was
used by two-thirds of respondents. Tourists mostly
choose city walks (38%), cycling trails (33%), and spa
& wellness offerings (32%). Recreational activities involv-
ing culture and entertainment included visiting pubs
and clubs (55%), cinemas (50%), museums (33%), and
theaters or the concert hall (27%). The main locations
of tourism activity in Szczecin included the Wały Chrob-
rego embankment (72%); the Kasprowicza, Jasne Błonia
and Ogród Różany (65%) parks; the Pomeranian Dukes’
Castle (63%); and the riverside promenade (62%).
A comparison of activities undertaken by tourists
visiting Szczecin and the leisure behavior of the city’s
residents shows considerable similarity both in terms
of activity type and the locations where they are under-
taken. It seems impossible not only to separate tourism
space from recreation space, but even to clearly delineate
tourism or recreation spaces within the city. Even places

Articles 51
offering accommodation, a service typically used by
tourists, commonly offer services used on a daily basis,
rather than incidentally, by residents (food, hosting
special events, conferences, spa & wellness services etc.).
The residents’ places of work, on the other hand, have
infrastructure enabling recreation.
This is a fitting illustration of the way these functions
overlap in space, especially in highly developed and
densely populated areas such as cities. The fact that the
same fragment of space may serve a variety of functions
is neither new nor extraordinary, but the progressive
overlapping of an increasing number of functions makes
it difficult to clearly identify the dominant function of
a given space. Simple quantitative assessments of the
intensity or prominence of specific phenomena in space
are becoming increasingly rare. This suggests difficulties
in identification of its identity (current and target), which
is significant e.g. for spatial planning or management.
5. CONCLUSION
The availability and use of leisure time contributes to
the psychological wellbeing of individuals and to the
quality of life in societies. In economic analyses, it is
important to include an assessment of the role played
by leisure in domestic budgets, social use of time,
socio-economic development, human capital creation,
economic welfare, and quality of life (C
ZAJA
2011,
p. 234). Leisure time resources and uses are becoming
a diagnostic category for socio-economic development
(B
OMBOL
2008). Quality of life can be evidenced by the
quantities and types of services used during leisure time.
Participation in leisure activities can be considered
a component and indicator of psychological wellbeing
and subjective quality of life. Demanding work creates
a need for leisure activities that differ substantially from
this work (B
OMBOL
2005, p. 27).
This has certain consequences for decisions related to
tourism and recreation behaviors. The increased number
of trips combined with their decreased duration has
contributed to an increased number of visits to urban
areas which have much to offer to residents and tourists
alike. Simultaneously, with the constant compression of
leisure time, tourism activities in the visited locations
become more similar to the leisure activities of residents,
which means both types of activities occur in the same
environment. Additionally, tourists wish to experience
the daily life of the city (tourism ‘off the beaten track’),
while residents ‘play at being tourists’ in their home
cities to discover it anew. Urban recreational and tourism
spaces overlap in a way that makes it impossible to
separate them, but still allows the distinction of certain
sub-spaces where either tourism or recreational
behaviors prevail.
ENDNOTES
1
The present paper does not purport to define the term
“recreational space” or provide a systematization of such spaces.
A broad discussion on the scope, attributes, functions, and classifi-
cation of recreational space and its relationships with tourism
and leisure spaces took place during the academic conference
titled “Przestrzenie rekreacji – granice i konteksty” [Recreational
spaces – boundaries and contexts] at the University of Łódź Faculty
of Geographical Sciences (Institute of Urban Geography and
Tourism), November 21–22, 2017. Conclusions from the dis-
cussion, which touched upon multiple aspects, should contribute to
the development of a final definition of recreational space and
a better understanding of relationships between recreational,
tourist, and leisure spaces. The working definition of recreational
space (and its divisions) used in the present paper is simply
a framework used primarily to accurately present the study
results.
2
These results might have been affected by the timing of the
study.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A
USTIN
D.R.,
L
EE
Y., 2013, Inclusive and special recreation oppor-
tunities for diverse populations to flourish, Sagamore Publishing
LLC, pp. 396.
B
ELLEZZA
S.,
P
AHARIA
N.,
K
EINAN
A., 2017, Conspicuous consump-
tion of time: When business and lack of leisure time become
a status symbol, Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (1), pp. 118-138.
B
OMBOL
M., 2005, Ekonomiczny wymiar czasu wolnego, Szkoła Głów-
na Handlowa w Warszawie, Warszawa.
B
OMBOL
M., 2008, Czas wolny jako kategoria diagnostyczna pro-
cesów rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego, Szkoła Główna Hand-
lowa w Warszawie, Warszawa.
B
UTLER
R., 2006, Volatile demand for tourism? – We can only
market efficiently to what we know, rather than to what we
imagine, [in:] P. Keller, T. Bieger (eds.), Marketing efficciency
in tourism. Coping with volatile demand, Erich Schmidt Verlag,
Berlin, pp. 13-22.
C
ZAJA
S., 2011, Czas w ekonomii, Wyd. Uniwersytetu Ekonomicz-
nego we Wrocławiu, Wrocław.
D
ĄBROWSKI
A. (ed.), 2006, Zarys teorii rekreacji ruchowej, Wyd.
AlmaMer WSE, AWF Warszawa, Warszawa.
D
RZEWIECKI
M., 1992, Wiejska przestrzeń rekreacyjna, Instytut Tury-
styki, Warszawa.
G
OŁEMBSKI
G.,
N
IEZGODA
A., 2012, The role of time in the global
tourism market – A demand perspective, [in:] M. Kasimoglu
(ed.), Visions for global tourism industry, InTech, Rijeka,
pp. 167-178.
G
ULAM
A., 2016, Recreation – need and importance in modern
society, International Journal of Physiology, Nutrition and Physical
Education, 1 (2), pp. 157-160.
H
AWORTH
J.T., 1997, Work, leisure and well-being, Routledge,
London, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=103046280.
H
URD
A.R.,
A
NDERSON
D.M., 2011, The park and recreation pro-
fessional’s handbook, http://www.humankinetics.com/
excerpts/excerpts/definitions-of-leisure-playand-recreation.
J
UNG
B., 2011, W kierunku nowej ekonomii czasu wolnego,
[in:] R. Winiarski (ed.), Rekreacja i czas wolny. Studia humani-
styczne, Oficyna Wydawnicza Łośgraf, Warszawa, pp. 160-174.
K
ACHNIEWSKA
M.,
N
AWROCKA
E.,
N
IEZGODA
A.,
P
AWLICZ
A.,
2012, Rynek turystyczny, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa.

52 Tourism /Turyzm 2018, 28/1
K
OWALCZYK
A., 2000, Geografia turyzmu, Wyd. Naukowe PWN,
Warszawa, pp. 287.
K
OWALCZYK
A., 2014, The phenomenology of tourism space,
Tourism/Turyzm, 24/1, pp. 9-15.
K
RAUS
R., 1971, Recreation and leisure in modern society, Appleton-
Century-Croft, New York, pp. 312.
K
RAUS
R.,
P
ETERSON
J.A.,
M
ARTIN
W.D., 1985, Recreation and leisure:
The changing scene, Jones and Burtlett Publishers, pp. 309.
L
ISZEWSKI
S., 1995, Przestrzeń turystyczna, Turyzm, 5, 2, pp. 87-103.
L
ISZEWSKI
S., 2013, Treści, formy, przestrzenie i klasyfikacje tury-
styki (artykuł dyskusyjny), [in:] R. Wiluś, J. Wojciechowska
(eds.), Nowe–stare formy turystyki w przestrzeni, ser. „Warsztaty
z Geografii Turyzmu”, 3, Wyd. Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego,
Łódź, pp. 9-20.
M
EERAS
L., 2010, Leisure and recreation, University of Tartu, College
Department of Tourism, Pärnu, pp. 50.
M
EYER
B. (ed.), 2015, Obsługa uczestników turystyki i rekreacji. Wy-
brane aspekty, Wyd. Difin
S.A., Warszawa, pp. 356.
M
YŚLIWSKA
K., 2011, Socjologia czasu wolnego, [in:] R. Winiarski
(ed.), Rekreacja i czas wolny. Studia humanistyczne, Oficyna Wy-
dawnicza Łośgraf, Warszawa, pp. 134-159.
N
IEZGODA
A., 2014, Czas wolny a zmiany na rynku turystycznym,
[in:] B. Krakowiak, J. Latosińska (ed.), Przeszłość, teraźniejszość
i przyszłość turystyki, ser. „Warsztaty z Geografii Turyzmu”,
5, Wyd. Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź, pp. 101-113.
N
IEZGODA
A., 2017, Leisure and tourism – relationship and
changes, Folia Turistica, 44.
Raport o stanie miasta Szczecin 2016, http://bip.um.szczecin.pl/
chapter_11808.asp?soid=E1F8717034EF4BC4A54CDD4C
73258EB4.
R
EICH
F.,
P
ECHLANER
H.,
H
OELZL
B., 2006, Price satisfaction in
the hotel industry, [in:] P. Keller, T. Bieger (eds.), Marketing
efficciency in tourism. Coping with volatile demand, Erich Schmidt
Verlag, Berlin, pp. 107-116.
R
EID
D.G.,
F
ULLER
A.M.,
H
AYWOOD
K.M.,
B
RYDEN
J., 1993, The
integration of tourism, culture and recreation in rural Ontario,
Queen’s Printer, Toronto.
T
ANAŚ
S., 2008, Miejsce cmentarzy w turystyce kulturowej – wokół
problemu badawczego, Turystyka Kulturowa, 2, pp. 4-16.
T
OCZEK
-W
ERNER
S., 2007, Podstawy rekreacji i turystyki, Wyd. Aka-
demii Wychowania Fizycznego, Wrocław.
T
OFFLER
A., 2001, Trzecia fala, Państwowy Instytut Wydaw-
niczy, Warszawa.
V
EAL
A.J., 1992, Definitions of leisure and recreation,
Australian Journal of Leisure and Recreation, 2 (4), pp. 44-48,
52; Republished by School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism,
University of Technology, Sydney, as Working Paper No.
4, accessed at: www.business.uts.edu.au/lst/research.
W
HITROW
G.J., 2004, Czas w dziejach, Wyd. Prószyński
i S-ka, pp. 296.
W
IĘCKOWSKI
M., 2014, Tourism space: an attempt at a fresh
look, Tourism/ Turyzm, 24/1, pp. 17-24.
W
ŁODARCZYK
B., 2014, Space in tourism, tourism in space: on
the need for definition, delimitation and classification,
Tourism/ Turyzm, 24/1, pp. 2
5-34.
Article received:
19 December 2018
Accepted:
26 February 2018