Exploring clustering as a destination development strategy for rural communities: The case

of La Brea, Trinidad.

The tourism industry in the rural community of La Brea in Trinidad and Tobago has
primarily focused on exploiting its main attraction: the Pitch Lake. The Ltd is the primary
driver of economic development in La Brea. Despite the presence of these industries, La
Brea remains a depressed community. In dealing with such issues, the Ministry of
Tourism (2010) has, through its National Tourism Policy, articulated the role of tourism
in fostering community-level socioeconomic growth. This study therefore seeks to
analyse the context for destination development in La Brea.
Thus, cluster theory is selected in this study as a strategy to foster integration in
attempting to develop La Brea into a tourism destination. The research seeks to explore
the possibility of developing a La Brea tourism cluster that includes the Pitch Lake as a
key attraction. More specifically, the study seeks firstly to determine whether or not the
study area possesses the conditions necessary for the development of a tourism cluster.
Secondly, barriers to tourism clustering in the study area will be identified. Thirdly,
various approaches are recommended to encourage tourism cluster development in
rural communities.
Literature review
1. Integration in rural tourism development: Several authors indicate, the concept of
Integrated Rural Tourism (IRT) ‘is proposed as a means of thinking critically and
comprehensively about the actors, resources, and relationships involved in this
notoriously fragmented industry’.
a. IRT can be viewed as: a web of networks of local and external actors, in which
endogenous and embedded resources are mobilised in order to develop the assets
and capabilities of rural communities. According to Saxena et al. (2007)
b. IRT is geared towards contributing to the sustainability of the rural tourism system
while empowering the host community (Cawley & Gillmor, 2008).
c. A key component in fostering integration and stimulating economic development in
rural destinations is, according to (Briedenhann & Wickens, 2004), the clustering of
activities and attractions.
This study therefore agrees that ‘the idea of IRT encourages a holistic conceptualization
of tourism, which in turn suggests a research methodology that engages with the
multiple actors involved in its constitution. Thus, in accordance with the work of Jackson
and Murphy (2006), Porter's (1990a, 1998a, and 1998b) cluster theory can be adapted
to a rural tourism context as a means of developing social capital, stimulating economic
development and enhancing the attraction and development of the destination.
2. Industrial cluster theory:
I. The foundation of cluster theory can be credited to Marshall’s ‘industrial district’ of
1890 (Porter, 1998b).
According to Porter (1998a):
a. Clusters are defined as ‘geographic concentrations of interconnected companies and
institutions in a particular field.
b. Clusters represent a novel way of conceptualizing the significance of location.
c. The central premise of Porter's (1998a, 1998b) cluster theory is that co-location
stimulates enhanced performance of companies.
d. Porter (1998a) identifies three main benefits of clustering: increased productivity of
companies within the cluster, heightened innovation and stimulation of new
business formation.

II. According to Novelli, Schmitz, and Spencer (2006), clusters are a means of enabling
participants to exploit the synergies and complementarities between outputs,
especially when operating at the SME level, thus allowing for regional development
through increased productivity, performance, innovation, and the critical mass of
local businesses.

III. A UNIDO (2005) study deemed most cluster initiatives in developing countries to be
underperforming.

IV. Wares and Hadley (2008) identify the presence of anecdotes about cluster strategies
in the developing world but believe that despite the shortage of conclusive evidence
either supporting or disproving their effectiveness, ‘cluster development remains an
option for stimulating growth in developing countries.

3. Tourism clustering:
I. In light of this, authors such as Pandit, Cook, and Swann (2001) have attempted
to draw similarities between clustering patterns in high technology
manufacturing and the services industry.
II. (Porter, 1998a, 1998b), though not extensively, highlights the mutual
dependence of businesses within a tourism destination.
In light of the conceptual similarities between tourism destinations and industrial
clusters, tourism clustering has emerged within the literature and in practice as a
paradigm for contemporary tourism destination development. Michael (2008) posits,
clustering theory has a critical role in tourism development especially for communities
that intend to build or enhance a tourism function as a component of their economic
strategy.
A tourism cluster can be defined as:
I. A complex group of different elements, including services carried out by tourism
companies or business (lodging, restoration, travel agencies, aquatic and theme
parks, etc. …)
II. Capone (2004) proposes a similar construct and defines a tourism cluster as a
geographic concentration of interconnected companies and institutions in
tourism activities.
III. Beni (2003) highlight the relational aspect of tourism clusters by stressing on the
importance of cohesion and linkages among political, social, productive and
business actors.
Tourism clusters are often developed with specific goals in mind:
I. As Novelli et al. (2006) indicate, the goal of a tourism cluster is to unite
otherwise independent companies to build a successful regional tourism
product.
II. Jackson and Murphy (2006), a tourism cluster's function is to ‘market the local
area and provide cooperative opportunities.
III. (Nordin, 2003) Tourism clusters provide the opportunity for players in the
industry to increase their collective markets and capacities by collaboration.
IV. Lade (2006) agrees, and acknowledges the role of tourism clusters in stimulating
local business that in turn leads to increased employment opportunities and
income.
Key success factors in tourism clustering:
The analysis of tourism cluster developments across the globe have given practitioners
and academics a point of reference in identifying the factors that contribute to a
cluster's success. Table 1 provides an overview of success factors from various case
studies.
Barriers to tourism clustering:
Essentially, the absence of key cluster success factors constitutes barriers to the cluster
development process. Each potential cluster region may possess characteristics within
its socio-economic environment that hinder cluster development. Table 2 outlines the
barriers to clustering discovered in case studies. The analysis of the case study areas
reveals that cluster initiatives are thwarted when the local tourism industry is socially
and institutionally fragmented.
4. Diamond analysis of a tourism cluster:
In light of the application of Porter's (1990a, 1990b, 1998a, 1998b):
Industrial cluster theory to tourism research as a result of spatial and conceptual
similarities to destinations, the development of a tourism cluster serves as a critical
destination development strategy.
Tourism research has adopted Porter's (1990a, 1990b) Diamond of National Competitive
Advantage as a framework for cluster analysis. In the context of tourism, the 'Diamond
Model' provides an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of a locality's business
environment.
According to the model, an effective cluster is best conceptualized as a manifestation of
the interactions among four critical facets: factor conditions, context for firm strategy,
structure and rivalry, demand conditions and related and supporting industries. Other
components of a successful cluster can include chance events and the influence of
government. These components of a cluster are outlined below:
a. Factor conditions - Human, physical, knowledge and capital resources and
infrastructure constitute a cluster's factor endowment (Porter, 1990b).
b. Demand conditions - Demand remains a critical component of the tourism system
and as Jackson and Murphy (2006) posit, it is necessary for touristic regions to
understand current and potential levels of demand. Nordin (2003, quoting Vanhove,
2002) in identifying the key components of addressing tourism demand: the size and
structure of the market; focusing on customer tastes and requirements and finding
the right market position; and strengthening the tourism culture of consumers and
host societies.
c. Related and supporting industries - All actors involved in creating a complementary
tourism product are considered in this segment of the diamond, e.g.
accommodation, transportation, and food and beverage (Jackson & Murphy, 2006).
d. Context for firm strategy, structure and rivalry - In the context of a micro-level
geographic space, socio-cultural factors can affect its business environment
including the operations of SMEs.
e. Chance and government - Chance events may have an influence on the cluster's
development potential. In the context of a micro-cluster, government policy can
either contribute to or hinder the possibility of success.
Porter's Diamond remains a key framework for the analysis of clustering.