Advances in Tourism Destination Marketing

Advances in Tourism Destination
Marketing
This volume provides original insight into the operational opportunities, challenges
and constraints in managing tourism destination marketing. It explores how the
various tourist destination systems including tourist, places (as seen by the tourist),
public and private tourism organisations and the social and physical environment
can effectively communicate and cooperate together at a profit for each.
Advances in Tourism Destination Marketing offers a comprehensive review of a
wide range of aspects related to marketing tourism products including networks in
destinations, consumer experiences in destinations, destination branding, destina-
tion image, events in destinations and destination tourism products. Throughout
the book a network analysis perspective is applied to offer alternative solutions of
how each system can share network knowledge and system knowledge so profits
can be created effectively and maximized. The exploration of new topics such as
destination networks and destination branding, as well as original international
empirical research and case studies from well-known researchers in the area,
provide new thinking on marketing tourism destinations.
The relevance of the arguments and the salient conclusions are valuable in the
study of an ever dynamic and burgeoning industry. This stimulating volume will be
of interest to higher level students, academics, researchers within tourism and prac-
titioners in the industry.
Metin Kozak is Professor of Marketing in the School of Tourism and Hospitality

Management, Mugla University, Turkey. He obtained his PhD degree in Tourism
from Sheffield Hallam University, UK (2000). He has widely published in the field
of tourism and hospitality marketing. His main research interests focus on con-
sumer behaviour, benchmarking, destination management and marketing, Mediter-
ranean tourism and research methods. Juergen Gnoth is an Associate Professor in
the Department of Marketing at the University of Otago, New Zealand. He has
published in many leading journals in tourism such as Annals of Tourism Research,
Tourism Management and Journal of Tourism Research, but also in general mar-
keting outlets such as the Journal of Advertising. He is also co-editor of a number
of special issues in tourism and academic books including Progress in Tourism
Marketing (Elsevier, 2006). Luisa Andreu is Associate Professor of Marketing at
the University of Valencia. Her research interests include consumer behaviour,
tourism marketing, service marketing and e-marketing. She has published articles
in Annals of Tourism Research, Tourism Management, European Journal of Mar-
keting and Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, among others.
Routledge advances in tourism
Edited by Stephen Page
University of Stirling, Scotland
1 The Sociology of Tourism

Theoretical and empirical investigations
Edited by Yiorgos Apostolopoulos, Stella Leivadi and
Andrew Yiannakis
2 Creating Island Resorts

Brian King
3 Destinations
Cultural landscapes of tourism
Greg Ringer
4 Mediterranean Tourism
Facets of socioeconomic development and cultural change
Edited by Yiorgos Apostolopoulos, Lila Leontidou and
Philippos Loukissas
5 Outdoor Recreation Management

John Pigram and John Jenkins
6 Tourism Development
Contemporary issues
Edited by Douglas G. Pearce and Richard W. Butler
7 Tourism and Sustainable Community Development

Edited by Greg Richards and Derek Hall
8 Tourism and Political Boundaries

Dallen J. Timothy
9 Leisure and Tourism Landscapes

Social and cultural geographies
Cara Aitchison, Nicola E. MacLeod and Stephen J. Shaw
10 Tourism in the Age of Globalisation
Edited by Salah Wahab and Chris Cooper
11 Tourism and Gastronomy

Edited by Anne-Mette Hjalager and Greg Richards
12 New Perspectives in Caribbean Tourism

Edited by Marcella Daye, Donna Chambers and Sherma Roberts
13 The Advanced Econometrics of Tourism Demand

Haiyan Song, Stephen F. Witt and Gang Li
14 Tourism in China
Destination, cultures and communities
Edited by Chris Ryan and Gu Huimin
15 Sustainable Tourism Futures

Perspectives on systems, restructuring and innovations
Edited by Stefan Gössling, C. Michael Hall and David B. Weaver
16 Advances in Tourism Destination Marketing

Managing networks
Edited by Metin Kozak, Juergen Gnoth and Luisa Andreu
Forthcoming:
Drive Tourism
Trends and emerging markets
Bruce Prideaux and Dean Carson
Sustainable Tourism in Rural Europe

Donald Macleod and Dr Steven Gillespie
Advances in Tourism
Destination Marketing
Managing networks
Edited by Metin Kozak, Juergen Gnoth

and Luisa Andreu
First published 2010
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2009.
To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s
collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.
© 2010 Selection and editorial matter, Metin Kozak, Juergen Gnoth

and Luisa Andreu; individual chapters, the contributors
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical
or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Advances in tourism destination marketing / [edited by] Metin
Kozak, Juergen Gnoth and Luisa Andreu.
p. cm. – (Advances in tourism)
1. Tourism–Marketing. I. Kozak, M. (Metin), 1968– II. Gnoth,
Juergen. III. Andreu, Luisa.
G155.A1A283 2009
910.68'8–dc22 2009002266
ISBN 0-203-87412-9 Master e-book ISBN
ISBN10: 0-415-49238-6 (hbk)

ISBN10: 0-203-87412-9 (ebk)
ISBN13: 978-0-415-49238-6 (hbk)
ISBN13: 978-0-203-87412-7 (ebk)
Contents
List of figures x
List of tables xi
List of contributors xiii
Preface xix
Part I
Destination marketing and management 1
1 Research in tourism marketing: an analysis of topics and

methodologies 3
E nri Q ue B ign É , A lejandro A lvarado H errera
and I sabel S Á nchez G arc Í a
2 Diversity, devolution and disorder: the management of

tourism destinations 15
A lan F yall , J ohn F letcher and
T hanasis S pyriadis
3 Success factors of tourism networks 27

E duardo P arra - L Ó pez and
F rancisco C alero - G arc Í a
4 Strategic positioning and performance of tourism

destinations 40
R uggero S ainaghi
viii Contents
Part II
Destination branding 57
5 A movie map conversion study: a case study of Pride &

Prejudice 59
S tephen P ratt
6 Music-tourism networks: a study of three festivals in

Queensland 74
B reda M c C arthy , G ianna M oscardo ,
L aurie M urphy and P hilip P earce
7 Destination brand licensing 88

M icha Ł Ż em Ł a
8 Destinations as gadgets: co-creating a sportive identity for

Voss 99
S zilvia G yimóthy and R eidar J ohan M ykletun
Part III
Destination networks 111
9 Networking approaches for sustainable destination

management 113
F rancesco P olese and A ntonio M inguzzi
10 Tourism destinations: a network analysis of the web space 125

R odolfo B aggio and
M agda A ntonioli C origliano
11 Exploring stakeholder roles in destination management

networks 138
M eredith L awrence
Part IV
Vacation decision making and choice 155
12 Influence of women’s lifestyles on holiday decisions 157

M ª J os É B arl É s , R afael B ravo and E lena F raj
Contents ix
13 Access and use of e-commerce in the Spanish tourism
market 170
J uan M uro , C ristina S u Á rez and
M ar Í a del M ar Z amora
14 The formation of destination choice sets: an interpretive

approach 183
A lain D ecrop
15 Risk perceptions and risk reduction strategies as

determinants of destination choice 195
A rie R eichel , G alia F uchs and N atan U riely
16 Identification of important service factors in group

package tours 207
Y u - S han L in , S hu - H
ui C hou and Y a - F
ang H ung
Part V
Consumer experiences and perceptions 219
17 Holiday resort visitor motivations and their relationship

with satisfaction 221
S ara C ampo and J oan B . G arau - V
adell
18 Building a tourist typology based on motivations for

visiting a cultural city 233
M iguel Ángel G ómez - B orja ,
C arlota L orenzo R omero ,
A lejandro M oll Á D escals and
J uan A ntonio M ond É jar J im É nez
19 Effect of complaint management on loyalty versus

probability of ending relationship 244
L eticia S u Á rez - Álvarez , A na M ar Í a D Í az - M art Í n
and R odolfo V Á z Q uez - C asielles
Index 255
Figures
1.1 Evolution and trends of tourism marketing papers within

ATR and TM 7
4.1 Sample description, commercial mix and strategic
positioning 45
5.1 Effective influence of the marketing campaign 66
6.1 Conceptual framework: density, strong and weak tie
connections 76
9.1 Network strategic dynamic 121
10.1 The Elba and Fiji networks 129
10.2 In-degree and out-degree cumulative distributions for
Elba and Fiji networks 130
11.1 Nature of relational ties: the Byron Bay planning and
destination management system 148
12.1 Proposed model 160
12.2 Results from the structural model 164
14.1 Conceptualization of destination CS 190
17.1 Results of the structural equation model 228
19.1 Conceptual model 247
19.2 Conceptual model test 250
Tables
1.1 Relative frequencies of tourism marketing papers published

at ATR and TM by main and specific topic and period 8
1.2 Relative frequencies of tourism marketing papers
published at ATR and TM by subsector 10
1.3 Relative frequencies and trends of quantitative methods
used in tourism marketing papers 11
3.1 Benefits of networks to building profitable tourism
destinations 30
3.2 Common activities and purpose 34
3.3 Respondents’ readiness to take part in a tourism network 36
4.1 Sample description, commercial mix and strategic
positioning 44
4.2 Empirical findings 48–49
4.3 Destination positioning and hotels’ competitive
performance 51
5.1 Visitors’ expenditure impact during their visits to the
destination 67
5.2 Summary of incremental expenditure due to the influence
of the movie map 68
6.1 Profile of festivals 78
6.2 Analysis of the three festivals against network constructs 79
10.1 Main characteristics of Elba and Fiji networks 129
11.1 Stakeholder groups represented in this study 141
12.1 Sample profile of the survey 161
12.2 Confirmatory factor analysis and final reliability 163
12.3 Path coefficients from the structural model 165
13.1 Percentage of e-commerce by tourists’ characteristics,
trip attributes and other control variables 174–175
13.2 Estimation of the probit model with sample selection 178–179
13.3 Estimated pseudo-elasticities 180
14.1 Types of CS in vacationers’ DM processes 187
15.1 Backpackers’ risk perception: factor analysis results
varimax rotation 200
xii Tables
15.2 Discriminant analysis results of Far East vs. South America
backpackers’ risk dimensions 202
15.3 Discriminant analysis of Far East vs. South America
backpackers – risk reduction strategies 202
16.1 Results of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis 212
16.2 Service quality evaluations for group package tours for
two cluster groups 213
16.3 Summary statistics of discriminant analysis using service
quality evaluation items as predictors 214
17.1 Factor analysis findings 226
17.2 Reliability and validity of the latent variables 227
18.1 Factor loadings for Prestudy 238
18.2 Factor loadings for Tostudy 239
18.3 Cluster size and characteristics 240
19.1 Goodness-of-fit indexes 250
Contributors
Alejandro Alvarado Herrera is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the

University of Quintana Roo, Mexico. He obtained his PhD in Mar-
keting from the University of Valencia, Spain. His research focuses on
corporate social responsibility, consumer behaviour, tourism marketing
and strategic marketing. He is a member of the editorial board of inter-
national journals.
Magda Antonioli Corigliano is Professor in Economics Theory and Policy
at Bocconi University, Italy, and at the Business School (SDA) of the
same university, and Director of the Master Course in Economics and
Tourism. She has carried out research and consulting activities in tour-
ism and environmental and industrial economics and authored various
publications.
Rodolfo Baggio holds a PhD in Tourism from the University of Queensland,
Australia. He is a lecturer at Bocconi University, Italy, and coordinates the
Information and Communication Technologies area of the Master in Eco-
nomics and Tourism. His current research combines complexity theory
and network analysis methods to the study of tourism destinations.
Enrique Bigné is Professor of Marketing at the University of Valencia,
Spain. He obtained his PhD in Business Administration and Economics
from the University of Valencia, Spain. His research focuses on advert-
ising, consumer behaviour, international marketing, tourism marketing,
service marketing and strategic marketing. He is a member of the edito-
rial board of several journals.
Rafael Bravo is Assistant Professor in Marketing at the University of
Zaragoza, Spain. His research is focused among other areas on young
consumer behaviour and brand management.
Francisco Calero-García is Reader in the Department of Financial Eco-
nomics and Accounting, University of La Laguna, Spain. He has a PhD
in Economics and Business. He is General Manager of La Laguna Uni-
versity. He works as a management consultant and project manager in
tourism for different organisations in the private and public sector.
xiv Contributors
Sara Campo is Associate Professor at the Universidad Autónoma de
Madrid, Spain, from which she obtained her PhD in Marketing. Sara
has published papers in several tourism journals. Her primary research
interests lie in price promotions, perceived prices, service quality, tourist
satisfaction and loyalty.
Shu-Hui Chou is Assistant Professor in the Department of Tourism, Provi-
dence University, Taichung, Taiwan. Her research interests include
tourism marketing, travel image, travel motivation and group package
tours.
Alain Decrop is Professor of Marketing at the Louvain School of Man-
agement and University of Namur, and a member of CeRCLe (Centre
for Research on Consumption and Leisure). He holds masters degrees
in History and Economics, and a PhD in Business Administration. His
major research interests include consumer decision making and behavi-
our, qualitative interpretive methods and tourism marketing.
Ana María Díaz Martín is Associate Professor of Marketing at Universidad
Autónoma de Madrid, Spain. Her research interests are primarily in the
areas of service quality, tourism marketing and relationship marketing.
She received her PhD in Business Administration in 1997 and she has
published mainly in the services marketing literature, both in national
and international journals.
John Fletcher is Professor of Tourism and Head of the International Centre
for Tourism Research, Bournemouth University, UK. He is Editor in
Chief of the International Journal of Tourism Research, a Fellow of the
Tourism Society and on the editorial board of a number of leading jour-
nals. He has undertaken numerous tourism research projects, specialis-
ing in development and economic impact studies.
Elena Fraj is Senior Lecturer in Marketing at the University of Zaragoza,
Spain. Her research is mainly focused on environmental consumer beha-
viour, environmental marketing and tourism marketing. She has written
a book on ecological consumer behaviour.
Galia Fuchs is Lecturer in the College of Management, Israel. Galia earned
her PhD in Ben-Gurion University and specialises in service marketing
and management. Recently, she studied tourist destination risk percep-
tions. She served on several advisory committees to the Israel Ministry
of Tourism.
Alan Fyall is Senior Member of the International Centre for Tourism and
Hospitality Research, Bournemouth University, UK. Alan has published
numerous articles and sits on the editorial boards of various tourism
journals. He has conducted teaching and led research in many countries
around the world and is currently an adviser to the Commonwealth
Tourism Centre based in Malaysia.
Contributors xv
Joan B. Garau-Vadell is Director of the School of Tourism of Eivissa, Ibiza
as well as Associate Professor at the Universitat de les Illes Balears,
Spain, from which he obtained his PhD in Tourism Marketing. His pri-
mary research interests are in tourism destinations marketing, seasonal-
ity, tourist satisfaction and loyalty.
Miguel Ángel Gómez-Borja holds a PhD degree in Business Administra-
tion, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. Currently, he is Associate
Professor of Marketing at the Albacete School of Economics and Busi-
ness, Spain. His research is focused among others on the impact of new
information technologies on consumer behaviour and retailing, new
marketing research tools and tourism marketing.
Szilvia Gyimóthy is Associate Professor at the Department of Service Man-
agement, Lund University, Campus Helsingborg, Sweden. She has an
extensive teaching experience in services marketing and tourism studies
in Scandinavia. Her main field of interest is studying leisure consump-
tion by multidisciplinary approaches, including phenomenological and
narrative analysis.
Ya-Fang Hung is Graduate Student at the Graduate Institute of Recre
ation, Tourism and Hospitality Management, National Chiayi Univer-
sity, Taiwan. Her research interests include database design of group
package tours and tourism marketing.
Mª José Barlés is Associate Professor of Marketing at the University
of Zaragoza, Spain. Her research interests include family decision
making and tourism marketing. She has participated in several tourism
projects.
Meredith Lawrence is Senior Lecturer in the School of Tourism and Hos-
pitality Management and Deputy Director of the Australian Regional
Tourism Research Centre based at Southern Cross University, Australia.
Meredith completed her PhD in 2006 and was awarded the Sustainable
Tourism Cooperative Research Centre Award for Excellence in PhD
research in 2007.
Yu-Shan Lin is a Doctoral Candidate at the Graduate Institute of Inter-
national Business Administration, Chinese Culture University, Taiwan.
Her research interests include service quality, customer comment cards
and group package tours.
Carlota Lorenzo Romero obtained her PhD in Business Administra-
tion, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. Currently, she is Assist-
ant Professor of Marketing in the Albacete School of Economics and
Business, Spain. Her research is focused on new information and com-
munication technologies, store atmosphere, electronic commerce and
e-merchandising and consumer behaviour.
xvi Contributors
Breda McCarthy is Lecturer of Marketing in the School of Business at
James Cook University, Australia. Her research interests include cul-
tural tourism, social network perspective and strategy formation pro
cess. She was the recipient of a Fáilte Ireland Research Fellowship in
2006/7, which enabled her to pursue research in the area of cultural
tourism.
María del Mar Zamora is Lecturer of Econometrics at the Department of
Statistics, Economic Structure and International Economic Organisa-
tion, Universidad de Alcalá, Spain, where she received her PhD in Eco-
nomics. She has published various articles in international journals. Her
research focuses specifically on the regional and industrial economics
and tourism markets.
Antonio Minguzzi is Professor of Management at University of Molise,
Italy, where he is Director of the Tourism Research Centre. He is a
member of editorial boards of international journals and he has been
scientific coordinator of international research projects. He has been
Visiting Professor at the University of Calgary (Canada) and is a member
of the Educational and Science Council of World Tourism Organization.
Alejandro Mollá Descals holds a PhD in Economics and Business Admin-
istration, University of Valencia, Spain. Currently, he is Professor of
Marketing at the Valencia School of Economics, Spain. His research is
focused on new technologies and retailing, retailing management, ser
vices marketing and consumer behaviour among others.
Juan Antonio Mondéjar Jiménez holds a PhD in Business Administration,
University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. Currently, he is Assistant Pro-
fessor of Marketing at the Cuenca School of Social Sciences, Spain. His
research interests are related to consumer behaviour and the Internet,
price perception and tourism marketing. He has participated in research
projects, papers and books in tourism marketing topics.
Gianna Moscardo is Professor in the School of Business at James Cook
University, Australia. Prior to joining the university in 2001, she worked
as tourism research project coordinator for the CRC for Reef Research.
Her background in psychology and sociology supports her interests
in understanding tourism as a tool for regional development and the
importance of experience to tourist behaviour.
Juan Muro is Professor of Economics at Universidad de Alcalá, Spain.
His research interests include micro econometrics, tourism economics,
labour economics, duration models, treatment effects and efficiency
measures and production frontiers.
Laurie Murphy is Senior Lecturer in the School of Business, James Cook
University, Australia. Her current research interests include destina-
Contributors xvii
tion branding and marketing, particularly at a regional level, and tour-
ist shopping villages. She has also published research on the backpacker
travel market based on her PhD research. Laurie teaches in the areas of
tourism marketing and research.
Reidar Johan Mykletun is Professor in Organisational Psychology, Uni-
versity of Stavanger, Norway. His research experience covers adventure
tourism, festivals and events, entrepreneurship, leadership and work-
force turnover. He is Editor in Chief of the Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, and member of the Royal Norwegian Scient-
ific Academy, Class of Humanities.
Eduardo Parra-López is Reader in the Department of Economics and Busi-
ness Management, University of La Laguna, Spain. He has a PhD in
Economics and Business, is Superior Technician in External Trade (EOI)
and collaborated with the Scottish Hotel School.
Philip Pearce is Foundation Professor of Tourism at James Cook Univer-
sity, Australia. His research interests are in studying tourist behaviour,
the development of communities through tourism and tourism educa-
tion. He teaches undergraduate subjects in tourist and leisure behaviour
and supervises a considerable number of PhD students.
Francesco Polese is Associate Professor at Cassino University, Italy. His
research interests cover networks and relationship management, R&D
management deepening sustainable tourism, viable networks and the
impact of social relations on business performance. He is President of
CUDH (University Centre of Disabilities and Handicaps) and Director
of MADILab (University Lab for Innovation Management).
Stephen Pratt is Research Associate at the Christel DeHaan Tourism and
Travel Research Institute, University of Nottingham, UK. His research
interests include tourism marketing, particular consumer behaviour
and destination marketing and all aspects of tourism economics. He
has worked for regional and national governments on a wide variety of
tourism projects.
Arie Reichel is the Dean of the Guilford Glazer School of Business and
Management, Ben-Gurion University (BGU), Israel. Arie specialises in
service marketing and management and has published in tourism and
hospitality journals. He established the Department of Hotel and Tour-
ism Management in BGU.
Ruggero Sainaghi is Researcher at the IULM University where he is
responsible for such courses as Destination Management and Analysis
of Financial Statements and Budgeting. His research interests are com-
petitive strategies, destination management and performance of hotel
firms.
xviii Contributors
Isabel Sánchez García is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University
of Valencia, Spain where she obtained her PhD. Her research interests
focus on direct marketing and consumer behaviour for services, with
particular attention to tourism marketing. Her work has been published
in Spanish and international journals.
Thanasis Spyriadis is a PhD candidate in the School of Services Manage-
ment, Bournemouth University, UK. He has an MSc in Tourism Man-
agement and Marketing and is currently developing an evaluation
framework for the organisational structures of Destination Management
Organisations. His research interests include strategy implementation,
organisational performance measurement and management.
Cristina Suárez is Lecturer of Econometrics at the Department of Statist-
ics, Economic Structure and International Economic Organisation, Uni-
versidad de Alcalá, Spain, where she obtained her PhD in Economics.
She has published various articles and is also involved in numerous aca-
demic and industrial projects. Her research interests include industrial
economics and service markets.
Leticia Suárez Álvarez is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the Univer-
sity of Oviedo, Spain. Her research interests are primarily in the areas
of tourism marketing, relationship marketing and consumer behavi-
our. She received her PhD in Business Administration in 2004, and she
has published mainly in the relationship marketing literature, both in
national and international journals.
Natan Uriely is Associate Professor at the Department of Hotel and Tour-
ism Management, Ben-Gurion University, Israel. Uriely’s research
focuses on various issues, including the tourist experience, eco-tourism
and guest–host interaction. His research is widely published in tourism
and leisure journals.
Rodolfo Vázquez-Casielles is Professor of Marketing in the Department of
Business Administration at the University of Oviedo, Spain. His research
includes distribution channels, tourism marketing, relationship market-
ing and market orientation. He is author and co-author of several mar-
keting books and has published in international marketing journals.
Michał Żemła is Assistant Professor of Tourism Marketing, Katowice
School of Economics, Poland. Michał’s main point of interest is destina-
tion marketing. He was the head of the research project Ski Resorts in
Poland founded by the Katowice School of Economics and is the author
of several papers.
Preface
The idea of contributing to the present volume originated during discus-

sions prior to the second Advances in Tourism Marketing Conference held
in Valencia, Spain, 10–12 September 2007. The initiative of ATMC started
in 2005 with the first international conference, hosted by Mugla University
in Akyaka (Turkey), in which more than 70 researchers and practitioners
from more than 15 different countries took part. Selected papers of this
conference have been published in a book volume entitled Progress in
Tourism Marketing with a total of 16 chapters (Kozak & Andreu, 2006).
In the second edition, hosted by the University of Valencia (Spain), we met
with around 160 researchers and representatives of companies and institu-
tions from five continents.
As in the first edition, we decided to continue the publication of selected
papers in the form of a book series. More specifically, the second volume
has been entitled Advances in Tourism Destination Marketing. The reason
for identifying this specific theme relates to the fact that, in today’s
growing competitive environment, tourism destinations rather than indi-
vidual attractions have become central to the management and marketing
of national tourism assets. This highlights the importance of destination
management and marketing. Its role is to direct tourism supply and ensure
that operators treat the needs of visitors as complex streams of expecta-
tions that are directed at the destination’s heterogeneous offerings.
Acknowledging the interdisciplinary nature of tourism, we would like to
stress in ATMC the definition of marketing, as released by the American
Marketing Association (AMA) and extended by applying it to tourism.
Tourism marketing thus focuses on the functions and processes of the
tourist system in order to create, communicate and deliver value with cus-
tomers (tourists, host communities and other firms) and for managing cus-
tomer relationships in ways that benefit the organisation and its
stakeholders, emphasising sustainability. During the ATMC 2007 confer-
ence, our keynote speaker, Professor Evert Gummesson, challenged
the new definition of marketing as published by the AMA. We would like
to support this challenge and offer both the original followed by the com-
plete revised version. In line with the ATMC 2007 conference theme, the
xx Preface
definition considers the fact that marketing occurs between networks of
firms and consumers and is a co-created bundle of benefits.
Marketing is a culture, an organizational function and a set of pro-

cesses for creating, communicating, and delivering value to customers
and for managing interacting in a network of customer relationships in
ways that benefit the organization, its customers and its other
stakeholders.
(Keefe, 2004)
Marketing is a culture, an organizational function and a set of pro-

cesses for creating, communicating, and delivering value with custom-
ers and for interacting in a network of relationships in ways that
benefit the organization, its customers and other stakeholders.
(Gummeson, 2008)
The suggested change to the definition is one of the many stimulating out-
comes of the 2007 conference as it is the aim of ATMC to focus – biannu-
ally – on updating and discussing topical issues in international tourism
marketing. The specific theme is usually drawn from the conclusions of the
preceding meeting, trends in the tourism industry and priorities in tourism
marketing research. All in all, the ATMC represents an attempt to explore,
analyse and evaluate the state of the art in tourism marketing from an
international perspective, bring together researchers, policy makers and
practitioners, and provide a forum for the discussion and dissemination of
themes related to the tourism system with a marketing approach. There-
fore, the initiative of ATMC represents an important contribution for the
tourism marketing research arena and tourism industry. The general
outcome of the ATMC focuses on facilitating the analysis and interchange
of sustainable approaches and international practices as a basis for know-
ledge and innovation management in tourism marketing.
Divided into five parts, this book includes 19 chapters. The first part
sets the foundation for this book by presenting four chapters related to the
marketing and management of tourist destinations. In the first chapter,
Bigné, Alvarado Herrera and Sánchez García provide a longitudinal view
of the evolution of the tourism and destination marketing literature over
the last 12 years focusing on the main and specific topics published, meth-
odological approaches, the statistical techniques and the quantitative
methods used by researchers. In the following chapter, Fyall, Fletcher and
Spyriadis continue to synthesise a variety of views on the benefits and
drawbacks of alternative destination management structures and bring
together a number of factors deemed critical and desirable to the successful
management of destinations in the UK. The third chapter, developed by
Parra-López and Calero-García, examines how networks can increase the
competitiveness of tourism businesses and destinations and also identifies
Preface xxi
the criteria that make such factors successful in the context of the Canary
Islands, Spain. The last chapter of this part, contributed by Sainaghi, is
devoted to demonstrating the critical importance of destination-based posi-
tioning decisions in understanding the competitive and economic perfor-
mance achieved by local businesses.
The second part gives an overview of current issues in destination
branding. First, Pratt evaluates the economic impact of a movie map-
inspired marketing campaign that drives tourist visitation and incremental
visitor expenditure in a destination. In the next chapter, McCarthy,
Moscardo, Murphy and Pearce trace the development of three music festi-
vals and look at the way in which management uses weak ties to develop
an innovative and diverse festival programme. This then helps them attract
and retain sponsors and develop new audiences. The third contribution is
offered by Żemła who introduces the idea of licensing to the management
of destinations and destination branding. In the final chapter of Part II, we
are introduced to the destination of Voss in Norway. Using this as an
example, Gyimóthy and Mykletun illustrate how a destination, that is, its
products, services and its tourists interact and draw on one other to co-
create a unique self.
Recognising the importance of networking in destination marketing and
including how events are created at destinations, the scope of the Part III is
dedicated to analysing “destination marketing: managing networks”, a
topic of high relevance to researchers, public institutions, the tourist indus-
try and other stakeholders. This part starts with the study by Polese and
Minguzzi on networking approaches for sustainable destination manage-
ment. This is followed by Baggio and Antonioli Corigliano who aim at
examining how network thinking can help in understanding the interac-
tions between tourism stakeholders within a destination by comparing two
tourism destinations: the Fiji Islands and Elba, Italy. This part is concluded
with a chapter by Lawrence who discusses concepts derived from policy
network theories to develop critical understandings of network dynamics
of stakeholders actively engaged in tourism destination policy, planning,
marketing and management for the destination of Byron Bay, Australia.
Focusing closely on destination marketing and management, the fourth
part relates to vacation decision making and choice. It begins with the
chapter by Barlés, Bravo and Fraj who analyse the influence of lifestyles on
women’s role in vacation decisions. As e-commerce has become a signific-
ant element in tourism research, this issue is studied by Muro, Suárez and
Zamora who demonstrate how observed and unobserved determinants of
access to the Internet help determine the online purchase of tourism prod-
ucts or services. Next, Decrop reconsiders the emergence of different types
of destination choice sets in an interpretive perspective by interviewing
Belgian citizens. In the fourth chapter, Reichel, Fuchs and Uriely compare
backpackers travelling to Central and South America and those travelling
to Southeast Asia. In particular, they concentrate on the effects of risk
xxii Preface
perceptions and risk reduction strategies in destination choice. Finally, Lin,
Chou and Hung evaluate how tourists assess the service quality of group
package tours and analyse the attributes that have a significant influence
on the satisfaction level and repurchase intentions of tourists in Taiwan.
With its three specific chapters, the final part of this volume deals with
perceptions and experiences of consumers in tourism. First, Campo and
Garau-Vadell propose a typology of tourists visiting Mallorca, Spain, on
the basis of their motivations and then analyse how these motivations
influence the level of tourist satisfaction. In a similar vein, Gómez-Borja,
Lorenzo Romero, Mollá Descals and Mondéjar Jiménez create a cultural-
tourist profile based on motivations that direct tourists to visit the specific
destination of Cuenca, registered as a world heritage site in Spain. Last but
not the least, Suárez-Alvarez, Díaz-Martín and Vázquez-Casielles investi-
gate the impact of complaint management and trust on the probability of
ending a relationship as well as on tourists’ attitudinal loyalty to three des-
tinations in Spain.
To sum up, in this volume you will find a list of chapters dealing with a
wide range of aspects related to marketing tourism products including net-
works in tourism destinations, consumer experiences in tourism destina-
tions, destination branding, destination image, events in tourism
destinations and destination tourism products. The methodologies of the
contributing authors include both qualitative and quantitative methods
ranging from survey methods to case studies. In this collaborative effort, a
number of different perspectives on the subject of tourism marketing are
presented by researchers from over 25 different institutions and 12 coun-
tries. It is our hope that the contributions accommodated in this volume
may help marketing and management in reflecting on their strategies of
segmenting, targeting and positioning as well as in process and product
development. We encourage the dialogue with academics and researchers,
government departments and NTOs (National Tourist Organisations),
event managers, consultants and planners in the tourism and travel indus-
tries. As a final comment, we would like to acknowledge and thank all the
authors for their contributions and commitment. We also thank Routledge
for giving us such a unique opportunity to publish this volume.
Metin Kozak, Juergen Gnoth and Luisa Andreu

The editors
References
Gummesson, E. (2008). Total relationship marketing. Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.
Keefe, L. M. (2004). What is the meaning of ‘marketing’? Marketing News,
8 September, 17–18.
Kozak, M. and Andreu, L. (2006). Progress in tourism marketing. London: Elsevier.
Part I
Destination marketing and

management
1 Research in tourism marketing
An analysis of topics and
methodologies
Enrique Bigné, Alejandro Alvarado Herrera
and Isabel Sánchez García
Introduction
Tourism has been one of the very last sectors to assume a marketing
approach focused on the consumer, and therefore marketing researchers
have been concerned about the identification of key trends in tourism mar-
keting only since the last decade (Bigné, 1996, 2004; Bigné, Andreu &
Sánchez, 2005; Mattila, 2004; Oh, Kim & Shin, 2004) in line with the
recent development of tourism as a scientific discipline (see Jafari, 2005).
The continuation and updating of past efforts is required since marketing’s
scope is still evolving (Day & Montgomery, 1999; Kerin, 1996; Oh et al.,
2004), as clearly illustrated by the most recent definition of the term “mar-
keting” adopted by the American Marketing Association (AMA, 2005;
Keefe, 2004) and its already discussed limitations (Grönroos, 2006;
Palmer, Lindgreen & Vanhamme, 2005).
Some papers have identified various tourism marketing trends in the
recent past (Bowen & Sparks, 1998; Mattila, 2004; Oh et al., 2004).
Although these are very valuable contributions to the tourism marketing
literature, a long range perspective of the evolution of the field cannot be
determined since it is not possible to establish a complete temporal link to
trace it. Xiao and Smith (2006a, b) provide such a temporal perspective
but they do not focus specifically on marketing but on tourism and hospi-
tality in general. Therefore, the present research is focused on identifying
research trends in tourism marketing through content analysis of the
papers published in the two top journals on tourism, Annals of Tourism
Research (ATR) and Tourism Management (TM), during the period
1995–2006, intending to be an extended update on Bigné (2004) and Bigné
et al. (2005), and establishing a complementary and comparative frame to
those.
Literature review
According to Zhao and Ritchie (2007), the growing acknowledgement of
the scientific status of tourism has led to a parallel increase in research
4 E. Bigné et al.
interest in the tourism academic community. They identify two main per-
spectives to deal with this type of research. The first aims to assess and
rank tourism journals, and it is usually based on tourism experts’ percep-
tions collected by means of a survey. The second approach focuses on
tourism researchers, trying to identify “the most frequently contributing
scholars and institutions in terms of publication productivity in a given
time frame” (p. 476).
An additional stream of this kind of research that can be identified
within tourism literature is based on the recognition and analyses of trends
(Van Doren & Heit, 1973) emerging from longitudinal observations of the
changes of topics and research methodology used by the authors (Xiao &
Smith, 2006b) such as those that have been made in the field of hospitality
(Baloglu & Assante, 1999; Crawford & McCleary, 1992; Xiao & Smith,
2006a, b) and in the field of tourism marketing and management (Bowen
& Sparks, 1998; Buhalis & Law, 2008; Mattila, 2004; Oh et al., 2004;
Pike, 2002).
Effectively, as Xiao and Smith (2006b) point out, state-of-the-art
tourism research can be a useful source of hypotheses on the evolution of
tourism knowledge because the empirical study of the content of the pub-
lished papers provides “hard data” to obtain verifiable and grounded con-
clusions. Therefore, researching published trends is useful for scholars as
well as for journal managers because what we are researching and publish-
ing and how we are doing it is an attractive issue for future researchers and
for tourism departments to establish research priorities.
Focusing on research trends in tourism marketing, Mattila (2004) made
a systematic analysis based on the consumer behavior articles published
during 2003 in 13 well-known tourism and hospitality journals with the
aim of identifying key trends on the subject. The author found that the
Internet was a relevant topic for hospitality researchers, followed by service
encounters, price issues, loyalty and shopping behavior. As far as tourism
researchers are concerned, studies mainly deal with destination marketing,
segmentation and decision making. Finally, in both subfields, survey was
found to be by far the most common methodology, whereas researchers
were reluctant to use experimental designs.
Oh et al. (2004), based on Bowen and Sparks’ (1998) work, analyzed
the content of the marketing papers published during 2002–03 in eight
tourism and hospitality oriented journals. The marketing topics that had
received more attention in the hospitality and tourism literature were
market segmentation and positioning, followed by satisfaction, complain-
ing and recovery behavior. Relationship marketing and new technologies
issues had also received some attention, while the least studied topics were
those related with social responsibility, physical distribution, theory and
philosophy of science and special marketing applications. Oh et al. found
that most of the studies (91 percent) were empirical, based on survey meth-
odology (63.7 percent).
Research in tourism marketing 5
Although the previous works provide very useful insights in tourism
marketing research, they focus on a narrow temporal period. Thus, the
main purpose of this study is to analyze the evolution in tourism marketing
research within two international top journals of tourism: ATR and TM,
considering a broad longitudinal perspective. We selected these journals
because they are the two best ranked journals of tourism according to the
recent research of McKercher, Law and Lam (2006) on the topic. More
specifically this research aims to fulfill four objectives. First, to identify the
trends in the number of tourism marketing papers included in TM and
ATR through the last 12 years, both at the global and at the journal level.
Second, to understand the evolution of the researched topics in tourism
marketing published in the previous journals throughout the last 12 years.
Also to recognize the most studied tourism subsectors throughout the last
12 years and their research trends. And, finally, to identify the most
common methodologies used by tourism marketing researchers and their
trends through the last 12 years.
Methodology
Content analysis methodology allows the symbolic content of communica-
tions to be evaluated in a quantitative, objective, systematic and reliable
manner (Kolbe & Burnett, 1991). Its main characteristics are: (a) clear
rules and classification procedures, (b) the adequate selection and training
of the judges, (c) pilot testing of the categories, (d) the independence and
autonomy of the coders and (e) the establishment of ad hoc reliability
indexes (Bigné, 1999; Kolbe & Burnett, 1991) such as those proposed by
Holsti (1969) and Perreault and Leigh (1989), among others. In addition,
the use of more than two judges and the solution of discrepancies based on
majority rules increase the objectivity of the analysis (Perreault & Leigh,
1989). Finally, if content analysis is used to replicate and to extend previ-
ous studies, as is the case here, the same procedure and classification
scheme are recommended (Stern & Resnik, 1991).
Following the above recommendations, we employed a two step
approach in this work. First, we carried out Content Analysis on the
190 papers published from 2004 to 2006 in ATR and TM that were
identified as “marketing tourism focused” by three judges. The abstracts of
the 404 featured papers published in TM and ATR from 2004 to 2006
were sent to the judges and they were asked to identify those focused
on tourism marketing. As a result, the judges selected 190 papers as
the universe of study corresponding to that period. The full text of the
190 papers was then sent to the judges within a database that included
an electronic form designed ad hoc to evaluate the following variables:
main and specific topic and, if applicable, subtopic; specific tourism
subsector addressed in the paper; methodological approach of the
paper; data collection techniques employed in the research; statistical
6 E. Bigné et al.
treatment of data; and quantitative techniques used to analyze the data (if
applicable).
Classification of general and specific topics and subtopics is based on
the Journal of Marketing’s classification scheme. Once the judges ended
their evaluations, their opinions were compared to determine the reliability
of the analysis. The agreement indexes achieved were higher than the
minimal acceptable standard of 0.8 (Perreault & Leigh, 1989; Riffe, Lacy
& Fico, 2005). Those related to the Main theme variable showed the
highest values: 0.874 (Holsti, 1969) and an Index of reliability Ir = 0.912
(Perreault & Leigh, 1989) for 95 percent confidence limits (0.889–0.937),
while the lowest were those related to the Specific theme variable: 0.827
(Holsti, 1969) and Ir = 0.904 (Perreault & Leigh, 1989) for 95 percent
confidence limits (0.878–0.929). After establishing the reliability, the
judges had to meet to try to agree on the papers where discrepancies per-
sisted after the first round of coding. The final database included 62 papers
published in ATR and 128 from TM.
The second step of the methodology encompasses integration of data
from 2004 to 2006 with the results obtained in previous research by Bigné
(2004) and Bigné et al. (2005) to obtain a broader longitudinal perspective
(from 1995 to 2006). Thus, the general database comprises a total of 382
papers; of those, 126 were issued by ATR and 256 by TM.
Discussion of findings
Regarding the percentage of tourism marketing oriented papers published
in TM and ATR from 1995 to 2006, the t test revealed that the relative
number of marketing papers issued by TM is significantly higher (38.9
percent) than the number of those papers published by ATR (22.5 percent)
during the 12 years studied (p < 0.01). During the last four years, there
seems to be an important increase in tourism marketing papers in both
journals, by about 40 papers per period, and especially in ATR. To cor-
roborate this trend, considering that the observations of the same objects
were equally spaced in time (Lessne & Hanumara, 1988), we calculated
polynomial trends for each journal and for both for the 12 year period.
The results confirmed this notion as shown in Figure 1.1.
Table 1.1 shows the evolution of main and specific research topics
covered by tourism marketing papers published at ATR and TM during the
1995–2006 period. The marketing environment has been the most studied
topic during the analyzed period, followed by marketing functions. Market-
ing research and other specific topics are, by far, the least appealing topics
for tourism marketing researchers. All differences are significant through
time at least for p < 0.05. However, as the relative number of papers focused
on marketing functions grows from 31.3 percent in 1999–2000 period to 50
percent during 2005–06, there seems to be a tendency change linked to the
second main theme investigated, which is detailed below.
60
50
40 R2 = 0.2865
Percentage
30
R2 = 0.6096
20 R2 = 0.4958
10
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
TM ’s tourism marketing papers

ATR ’s � TM ’s tourism marketing papers
ATR ’s tourism marketing papers
ATR � TM polynominal trend
TM polynominal trend
ATR ’s polynominal trend
Figure 1.1 Evolution and trends of tourism marketing papers within ATR and TM
(source: own elaboration, based partially on data from Bigné et al.,
2005).
Note
Data were grouped in two year periods only to assist tables’ building and reading. All trends
were calculated on yearly basis.
Similarly to the scheme described above, to confirm these findings, we

used polynomial trends (Lessne & Hanumara, 1988) for each of the three
main themes studied during the 12-year period. The results show that: (i)
research concerned with marketing functions started to gain strength in the
last eight years whereas, (ii) research into marketing environment tends to
decrease and (iii) papers on marketing research issues seem to become less
interesting for the top tourism journals.
Regarding specific topics, consumer/traveler behavior (41.1 percent) is,
by far (p < 0.01), the most studied issue within published tourism market-
Table 1.1 Relative frequencies of tourism marketing papers published at ATR and TM by main and specific topic and period
Main topic/Specific topic Period

1995–96 1997–98 1999–2000 2001–02 2003–04 2005–06 1995–06
(n = 43) (n = 39) (n = 48) (n = 44) (n = 80) (n = 128) (n = 382)
Marketing environment** 60.5 59.0 58.3 47.7 48.8 45.3 51.0

Market and demand analysis 9.3 12.8 2.1 0.0 1.3 0.8 3.1
Consumer/traveler behavior 46.5 43.6 56.3 34.1 41.3 35.2 41.1
Demographic, socio-cultural, legal, 4.7 2.6 0.0 4.5 1.3 4.7 3.1
political and economic issues
Ethics and social responsibility 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 3.8 4.7 3.4
Marketing functions** 37.2 33.3 31.3 36.4 41.3 50.0 41.1
Management and planning 9.3 10.3 12.5 9.1 5.0 9.4 8.9
Marketing strategy 7.0 5.1 6.3 9.1 20.0 21.1 14.4
Distribution channels 2.3 2.6 0.0 2.3 2.5 0.0 1.3
Marketing and new technologies 0.0 5.1 0.0 6.8 6.3 3.1 3.7
Pricing 4.7 0.0 4.2 2.3 1.3 0.8 1.8
Products and services 7.0 7.7 8.3 0.0 3.8 10.2 6.8
Sales promotion 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.8 1.8
Advertising 4.7 2.6 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.8 0.8
Other forms of communication 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 3.9 1.8
Marketing research** 2.3 7.7 10.4 13.6 10.0 3.9 7.3
Research methodology 2.3 7.7 10.4 13.6 10.0 3.9 7.3
Other specific theme** 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.8 0.5
Source: Own elaboration, based partially on data from Bigné et al. (2005).
Notes
** All main theme differences are significant at p < 0.01 except Marketing environment and Market functions, which is significant at p < 0.05 level.
ing, followed by marketing strategy (14.4 percent), management and plan-
ning (8.9 percent) and products and services (6.8 percent). Once again,
apparently there are changes in specific topics tendencies that could
explain, at least partially, the changes detected in the main topics. Findings
show that marketing strategy issues are becoming more relevant to tourism
marketing researchers, while products and services-focused papers only
present a moderate increase and consumer/traveler behavior research has
slightly descended. As Table 1.2 shows, destinations (38 percent) and types
of tourism (24.3 percent) have been the preferred tourism subsectors for
marketing researchers, followed by works that are not focused on a spe-
cific subsector (16 percent).
To identify the most common methodologies used by tourism marketing
researchers, we analyzed four variables containing judgments on the
paper’s methodological approach, the data collection techniques employed
in the research, the kind of statistical data analysis and the quantitative
techniques used. Concerning the methodological approaches used in
tourism marketing oriented papers through time, clearly far fewer theoreti-
cal articles have been published than empirically based papers at global
level and per journal. Moreover, there is a global tendency to continue
increasing the relative amount of empirical works (R2 = 0.46) to the detri-
ment of the theoretical ones.
Regarding data collection techniques, the most common ones have been
ad hoc questionnaires, used in 67.6 percent of the papers, followed by sec-
ondary data collection (18.8 percent) and in depth interviews (17.9
percent). The least used types of data collection were creativity and projec-
tive techniques. These findings are consistent with the preeminence of
quantitative over qualitative methods in tourism, as already pointed out by
Walle (1997). Trends show that the use of ad hoc questionnaire based
research is suffering a moderate decrease (R2 = 0.23) in relative terms, in
favor of the use of secondary data (R2 = 0.23) and in depth interviewing
(R2 = 0.25). The most frequently used combination of statistical analyses
has been the one that comprises univariate, bivariate and multivariate data
analysis (27 percent), followed by the use of univariate and bivariate tech-
niques (23.9 percent) and by the use of univariate and multivariate tech-
niques (15 percent).
Finally, we investigated the most used quantitative techniques in data
analysis by analyzing trends in addition to relative frequencies (Table 1.3)
because the quantitative variable is multiple response. All quantitative
techniques have a positive tendency except for the use of Correspondence
Factor Analysis. The most powerful upward trends are the use of struc-
tural equations modeling/path analysis, principal components analysis and
discriminant analysis.
Table 1.2 Relative frequencies of tourism marketing papers published at ATR and TM by subsector
Subsector Period
1995–96 1997–98 1999–2000 2001–02 2003–04 2005–06 1995–2006
(n = 43) (n = 39) (n = 48) (n = 44) (n = 80) (n = 128) (n = 382)
Destinations** 37.2 33.3 33.3 43.2 28.8 45.3 38.0

Transportation 2.3 2.6 4.2 2.3 6.3 4.7 4.2
Lodging 2.3 5.1 10.4 9.1 12.5 6.3 7.9
Types of tourism** 32.6 30.8 39.6 15.9 18.8 20.3 24.3
Intermediaries/travel agencies 2.3 5.1 4.2 6.8 7.5 6.3 5.8
Restaurant/food services 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.3
No specific subsector 23.3 23.1 8.3 20.5 20.0 10.2 16.0
Other subsector 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 5.0 3.1 2.4
Multiple subsectors 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 1.3
Notes
** “Destinations” is significant at p < 0.01 when compared with all other subsectors but “Types of tourism.” “Types of tourism” is significantly different
at p < 0.01 when compared with all other subsectors but “Destinations” and “No specific subsector.”
Table 1.3 Relative frequencies and trends of quantitative methods used in tourism
marketing papers
Quantitative technique used to analyze the data* 1995–2006 Trend/R2
Descriptive statistics 41.3% ↑ 0.772

Correlations 8.0% ↑ 0.645
Regression analysis 8.6% ↑ 0.530
Cluster/Chaid analysis 4.4% ↑ 0.452
Principal components analysis 15.3% ↑ 0.814
Correspondence factor analysis 2.0% R2 < 0.20
Multidimensional analysis 1.1% ↑ 0.470
Discriminant analysis 0.5% ↑ 0.809
Conjoint analysis 0.8% ↑ 0.534
Confirmatory factor analysis 4.2% ↑ 0.681
Structural equations modeling/path analysis 4.4% ↑ 0.859
Neural models/data mining 1.0% ↑ 0.737
Other 8.5% ↑ 0.636
Notes
* Multiple response variable.
Arrow direction meaning:
↑ positive trend.
↓ negative trend.
Conclusions and implications

This research is focused on identifying marketing research trends in top
tourism journals in order to provide guidance for future research. Con-
cerning main topics, and consistently with previous studies (Bigné, 2004;
Bigné et al., 2005), the most studied topic is marketing environment and
consumer behavior is the most relevant specific topic, with special atten-
tion to internal factors affecting purchasing decision and post-purchase
experience. Marketing functions is the second most studied topic and mar-
keting planning and strategy are the most studied specific topics, followed
by research on products and services. However, in recent years the relative
number of papers published on marketing environment has been decreas-
ing while the number of papers on marketing functions has been gaining
strength. The most studied subsectors within tourism marketing papers
have been destinations and types of tourism. However, this second subsec-
tor has persistently lost ground while transportation has been growing in
importance.
With respect to the identification of the most common methodologies,
as in the past (Bigné, 2004; Bigné et al., 2005; Oh et al., 2004), the empiri-
cal approach continues to dominate the published research in tourism
journals, even when it has been noted that the tourism discipline still needs
to develop domain-specific theories (Oh et al., 2004). Statistical data ana
lyses are gaining rigor and it appears that the use of combined univariate,
12 E. Bigné et al.
bivariate and multivariate techniques will continue. However, as Oh et al.
(2004) point out, “methods are just means” (p. 441) and they only gener-
ate meaningful knowledge when they are based on solid conceptual
research goals.
The main limitation of this study derives from having analyzed only two
journals, although the selected publications are considered top journals.
Despite this limitation, the portrayed research panorama allows the identi-
fication of some aspects that have received little attention in tourism mar-
keting literature over the last 12 years and, hence, we propose them as
future lines of research.
In this sense, it is suggested to analyze pricing fixation strategies and
tactics and their repercussion in consumer and traveler behavior. Research
efforts should be devoted to the transformational function played by new
technologies in tourism marketing management and in the ways tourism
companies serve their clients as well. Similarly, although a moderate incre-
ment of the number of featured articles centered on tourism marketing cor-
porate social responsibility and ethics has been detected, these are still
under-researched aspects. Also, the decreasing trend in the relative number
of tourism marketing papers focused on research methodology issues invites
reinforcement of academic work on this topic, since new tourism marketing
approaches require the development of appropriate analysis methodologies.
Finally, it is well known that several public and private actors are
involved in destination management. Therefore networks creation and
management are a key issue at academic and managerial levels, and this
makes application of the proposed research lines to tourism destinations a
major challenge for researchers. And this complexity seems to be the best
guarantee for the growth of new and multifaceted research.
References
AMA (2005). New definition of marketing. Retrieved October 27, 2006, from
http://www.marketingpower.com/content24159.php.
Baloglu, S. & Assante, L. (1999). A content analysis of subject areas and research
methods used in five hospitality management journals. Journal of Hospitality
and Tourism Research, 23(1), 53–70.
Bigné, E. (1996). Turismo y marketing: Una revisión y perspectivas de futuro.
Revista de Estudios Turísticos, 129, 105–127.
Bigné, E. (1999). El análisis de contenido. In J. F. S. Sánchez (Ed.), Metodología
para la investigación en marketing y dirección de empresas (pp. 255–271).
Madrid: Pirámide.
Bigné, E. (2004). Nuevas orientaciones del marketing turístico: De la imagen de
destinos a la fidelización de los turistas. Papeles de Economía Española, 102,
221–235.
Bigné, E., Andreu, L. & Sánchez, I. (2005). Investigación en marketing turístico:
Un análisis de las publicaciones en el período 1995–2003. Paper presented at the
XV Jornadas Hispano-Lusas de Gestión Científica, Sevilla.
Bowen, O. T. & Sparks, B. A. (1998). Hospitality marketing research: A content
analysis and implications for future research. International Journal of Hospital-
ity Management, 17(2), 125–144.
Buhalis, D. & Law, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism
management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet—The state of eTourism
research. Tourism Management, 29(4), 609–623.
Crawford, S. & McCleary, K. (1992). An identification of the subject areas and
research techniques used in five hospitality related journals. International Journal
of Hospitality Management, 11(2), 155–167.
Day, G. S. & Montgomery, D. B. (1999). Charting new directions for marketing.
Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 3–13.
Grönroos, C. (2006). On defining marketing: Finding a new roadmap for market-
ing. Marketing Theory, 6(4), 395–417.
Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities.
Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Jafari, J. (2005). The scientification of tourism. Política y Sociedad, 42(1), 39–56.
Keefe, L. M. (2004). What is the meaning of “marketing”? Marketing News,
38(15), 17–18.
Kerin, R. A. (1996). In pursuit of an ideal: The editorial and literary history of the
Journal of Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 60(1), 1.
Kolbe, R. H. & Burnett, M. S. (1991). Content-analysis research: An examination
of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity.
Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 243–250.
Lessne, G. J. & Hanumara, R. C. (1988). Growth curve analysis in marketing:
Method and application, Journal of Marketing Research, 25(4), 391.
McKercher, B., Law, R. & Lam, T. (2006). Rating tourism and hospitality jour-
nals. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1235–1252.
Mattila, A. S. (2004). Consumer behavior research in hospitality and tourism jour-
nals. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 23(5), 449–457.
Oh, H., Kim, B.-Y. & Shin, J.-H. (2004). Hospitality and tourism marketing:
Recent developments in research and future directions. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 23(5), 425–447.
Palmer, R., Lindgreen, A. & Vanhamme, J. (2005). Relationship marketing:
Schools of thought and future research directions. Marketing Intelligence and
Planning, 23(3), 313–330.
Perreault, W. D., Jr. & Leigh, L. E. (1989). Reliability of nominal data based on
qualitative judgements. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(2), 135.
Pike, S. (2002). Destination image analysis – a review of 142 papers from 1973 to
2000. Tourism Management, 23(5), 541–549.
Riffe, D., Lacy, S. & Fico, F. G. (2005). Analyzing media messages: Using quanti-
tative content analysis in research (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Stern, B. L. & Resnik, A. J. (1991). Information content in television advertising: A
replication and extension. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(3), 36–46.
Van Doren, C. & Heit, M. (1973). Where It’s At: A Content Analysis and
Appraisal of the Journal of Leisure Research. Journal of Leisure Research, 5(1),
67–73.
Walle, A. (1997). Quantitative versus qualitative tourism research. Annals of
Tourism Research, 24(3), 524–536.
14 E. Bigné et al.
Xiao, H. & Smith, S. L. J. (2006a). The maturation of tourism research: Evidence
from a content analysis. Tourism Analysis, 10(4), 335–348.
Xiao, H. & Smith, S. L. J. (2006b). The making of tourism research: Insights from
a social science journal. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(2), 490–507.
Zhao, W. & Ritchie, B. (2007). An investigation of academic leadership in tourism
research: 1985–2004. Tourism Management, 28(2), 476–490.
2 Diversity, devolution and
disorder
The management of tourism
destinations
Alan Fyall, John Fletcher and
Thanasis Spyriadis
Introduction
It is widely acknowledged that ‘the destination lies at the very heart of the
travel and tourism system, representing as it does an amalgam of products
that collectively provide a tourism experience to consumers’ (Fyall, Garrod
and Tosun, 2006, p. 75). The fact that destinations comprise so many
products, stakeholders and complex management and political relation-
ships, contribute to them being regarded as one of the most difficult ‘prod-
ucts’ to manage and market (Buhalis, 2000). To manage best the
complexities and ‘imperfections’ inherent within destinations it is therefore
accepted that destinations need to bring together all parties to collaborate
rather than to compete, and to pool resources towards developing an integ-
rated management and delivery system (Buhalis & Cooper, 1998; Fyall &
Garrod, 2005; Prideaux & Cooper, 2002; Telfer, 2001). Referred to by
King (2002) as the ‘network economy’, destination management organisa-
tions are, in the future, recommended to enter into strategic relationships
with partners who collectively can deliver a seamless visitor experience to
customers. King (2002, p. 108) argues that this will occur due to the fact
that it is the ‘relevance of the experience they offer the customer, rather
than the destination they promote, which will be the key ingredient for
success in the future’.
In view of the calls for a more collaborative approach to the manage-
ment of destinations (Palmer & Bejou, 1995), many destinations in
England are beginning to re-evaluate their modus operandi and begin to
address four quite fundamental questions, namely: what functions should
an effective destination management organisation carry out to provide
maximum short-, medium- and long-term benefit to the destination; what
is a reasonable allocation of resources to each of these functions; what is
the most appropriate form and structure for any new organisation; what
other models exist and what lessons can be learnt from other successful
and failed partnerships? The aim of this chapter, therefore, is to critically
evaluate existing and emerging collaborative destination management
16 A. Fyall et al.
structures in England. Set within the specific context of the devolution of
tourism that currently exists in the country the chapter examines a number
of case studies and identifies a series of lessons to be drawn for the future
management of destinations in England.
Literature review
A number of forces and issues are at play in the wider environment that
are driving change in the management of destinations. These include the
necessity to adhere to the needs, wants and expectations of more mature
and knowledgeable customers; the requirement for more accurate and con-
temporary information upon which to make decisions; the recognition of
intermediary pressures and the imbalance of channel power in destinations;
the exponential growth of discount airlines and ‘surplus’ of destinations in
the marketplace; and the continued and long-standing division between the
public and private sector management (Bennett, 1999). A more recent
study by King (2002, p. 106), while acknowledging many of the above,
commented on the need to focus on the destination ‘experience’ rather
than ‘what the destination has to offer’. King adds that it is now ‘the cus-
tomer who can decide how and when they access their travel and tourism
information and how and through what process they access and purchase
their travel and tourism arrangements’ (p. 106).
As stated previously, tourism and the management of destinations is
increasingly becoming a more complex business and as such greater profes-
sionalism is needed vis-à-vis its management (Ashworth & Goodhall,
1990; Augustyn & Knowles, 2000; Bramwell, 2006; Buhalis, 2000;
Dredge, 2006; Wang & Fesenmaier, 2007). Although many local authori-
ties have a strong history of managing the destination well, for the future a
more dynamic and innovative structure and approach are required that
incorporate the views of all stakeholder groups that will advance destina-
tions in a more holistic manner and facilitate the delivery of a ‘seamless’
visitor experience. Market forces are also such that destinations now need
to be far more proactive in responding to market needs. Visitors have far
more choice and variety of destinations than ever before. Many have
increasing leisure time and more disposable income, are sophisticated and
demonstrate higher expectations.
In addition to the above, visitors are also able to benefit from improved
communications, cheaper travel, cheaper accommodation and the exten-
sive use of the Internet. Increasingly, destinations have to work within the
context of regional airport expansion, and accommodate visitors seeking
experiences and shorter stays. Convenience is key as is the need for desti-
nation distinctiveness. Changing booking trends are also significant in that
patterns of visitor decision making, booking and payment all need to be
reflected in a new approach to the wider management of tourism at the
destination level.
Diversity, devolution and disorder 17
In order to accommodate industry and market changes, therefore, far
more proactive and ‘light-footed’ destination management organisations
are required to keep abreast of developments. It is true that tourism
requires some form of ‘local’ control but alongside this, there is the need
for far greater innovation and creativity. New structures need to be less
adversarial in their approach as there remains a sense of genuine frustra-
tion among industry figures that previous structures have been more exclu-
sive, rather than inclusive, in their orientation with many lacking a suitable
vision for the future with a tendency to rely on ‘more of the same’.
Although the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in spring 2001 in the
UK and the soon thereafter destruction of the Twin Towers in New York
on 9/11 were significant events in shaping the future of tourism in the UK,
in England political devolution and the regionalisation of tourism came to
the fore in 2003 when the mantra of ‘greater leadership by regions in
tourism strategy’ was expanded in that strategic responsibility for regional
tourism was devolved by central government. The principal outcome of
this decision was that the funding, delivery, management and responsibility
for sectoral performance of tourism now resided with England’s nine
Regional Development Agencies (RDAs). The RDAs have now become an
integral element of the delivery of domestic tourism in England and are
today in the process of either developing or implementing their regional
sustainable tourism strategies. It is within this context that the potential
future management of destinations in England is examined.
Working on the assumption that a more collaborative and holistic
approach to the management of destinations in England will involve at
best the same but most probably less resources from local authorities,
many emerging Destination Management Organisations (DMOs) are fore-
cast to be of an ‘arm’s length’ nature in the future. In reality, this means
that many DMOs may operate outside local authority control and repre-
sent public–private sector partnerships that are inclusive of the trade and
stakeholder groups with a mandate to develop the destination in its
entirety. If this is to be the way forward, a number of benefits and draw-
backs are anticipated. The potential benefits of establishing such an
approach is that it often provides a vehicle to share ownership for the man-
agement of tourism in the destination between the local authority, industry
and other stakeholders, continues to facilitate the opportunity to minimise
overheads and can enhance stronger partnership working across adminis-
trative boundaries. Such an approach can also encourage the industry to
engage more fully in the wider development of the destination and be more
responsive to the changing needs of the market, to develop a greater sense
of focus and trade ‘buy-in’ – particularly with regard to marketing – and
be free of local political bias, and offer greater opportunities to engage and
sustain the support of all stakeholders. Finally, such an approach is ulti-
mately expected to reduce duplication of effort and facilitate improvements
in quality.
18 A. Fyall et al.
In contrast, the potential drawbacks of adopting an ‘arm’s length’
approach to the management of destinations include the means by which
such a structure facilitates the ease with which the local authority can
reduce its contribution to the development of the destination and have the
potential to reduce the local authority’s interest – and commitment – to
tourism, makes more difficult the relationships with ‘other’ services and
how they are managed and relationships maintained, and leads potentially
to a gradual dilution of investment in the destination brand. Conflict with
other membership organisations can also occur while such structures can
generate excessive expectations on the part of the private sector and, in the
short term, impact on the stability of the organisation throughout the
initial period of organisational adaptation and learning.
Methodology
In order to critically evaluate existing and emerging collaborative destina-
tion management structures in England, initial insights were gained from a
variety of secondary sources and conference materials. Key secondary
sources used at the outset included work by NWDA (2004), Pike (2004)
and World Tourism Organisation (WTO, 2002, 2004). In addition, a large
number of face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted with des-
tination managers across a number of regional and subregional destina-
tions in England to elicit the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats of the management of their respective destinations.
To identify good practice and those factors deemed critical and desira-
ble to the success of managing destinations in the future, a combination of
face-to-face and telephone interviews and focus groups were conducted
with a large number of managers of destinations across the country in
addition to a selection of RDAs and Regional Tourist Boards. In addition,
a review of a number of recent studies was conducted to identify existing
and future trends of the management of destinations in the international
context. This includes the review of a study conducted for the WTO (2004)
as well as the recent Benchmark Survey of Convention and Visitors
Bureaux around the world (Koutoulas, 2004). The review of international
practice was an important aspect of the projects in that it helped set the
challenges being faced by the two destinations in a more global context.
Above all, it highlighted the continued role played by the public sector gen-
erally, and by local authorities in particular, in the management of tourism
at the destination level irrespective of the management structures in
existence.
Here, some brief key findings from an extensive review of contemporary
destination management practice within England are summarised. Before
that, however, it is worth highlighting a number of forces that came to
light from the face-to-face and telephone interviews conducted as part of
the study. Although cost is clearly not the sole driver, funding cuts and the
need to simply maintain existing funding levels is partly driving the need
for change. Pressure on budgets, especially at the local level, is such that
many non-statutory services (such as tourism) are under constant review in
local authorities across the country. It is not unusual for those managing
destinations to manage savings in the region of 10–15 per cent per year for
the next four to five years irrespective of any changes in national govern-
ment. This clearly will have an impact on the private sector in that a
greater proportion of destination funding will have to be found outside the
traditional public purse. And, although some regions have offered tourism
as an industry substantial investment the extent to which this has filtered
down to destinations is somewhat debatable.
Cost aside, it is fair to say that despite the importance of tourism to
local, subregional and regional economies and its rich tourism heritage,
perceptions both from within and outside destinations suggest that a
number of other issues are beginning to challenge the existing status quo
of tourism within the political hierarchy. Advocates of tourism within des-
tinations clearly exist, but a deeper understanding of the complex dynam-
ics of the industry, the forces of change and their impacts, are believed to
be less well understood. This also applies to the clear benefits the industry
delivers, not only to visitors but the substantial resident populations in
many destinations. Whereas local authorities have historically been the
principal vehicles for the routing of funding (especially capital projects) the
devolution of tourism in England is significant in that the regions are now
the principal hubs for the routing of such funding.
With regard to specific destinations, the future of Blackpool as a desti-
nation is closely interlinked to its massive programme of urban regenera-
tion while it sits within a region – the northwest – that is highly structured
and well funded in its approach to the regional development of tourism.
Blackpool is however faced with budget pressures at the local level and is
becoming more and more commercial in its outlook to maintain its com-
petitive position in the marketplace. Specific to this chapter is that Black-
pool’s tourism industry is deemed to have an insufficiently mature
relationship with its tourism department as yet to warrant the adoption of
an ‘arm’s length’ approach to tourism.
Marketing Manchester is frequently lauded as an excellent model for
the management of destinations. It is in fact one of a group of urban
destination marketing organisations that has grown in stature over the
past decade via its innovative attempts at reinvigorating often old indus-
trial areas into chic and fashionable destination products. Although in
stark contrast to the challenges facing traditional ‘resort’ and ‘rural, herit-
age’ destinations, Marketing Manchester represents a considerable ‘integ-
rated’ pan-conurbation DMO that incorporates numerous political and
20 A. Fyall et al.
administrative boundaries. It demonstrates a sound collective vision for the
Greater Manchester area, is strongly commercial in its remit and has been
central to the wider urban regeneration of the area in addition to the mar-
keting of the tourism offer. Marketing Manchester has also been a signific-
ant recipient of regional funding.
The North West Regional Development Agency (NWDA) offers its sub-
regional DMOs considerable direction and funding in enabling them to
deliver the subregional tourism product in a more collective and consistent
manner than is evident across most other regions. It recognises that each of
its DMOs are at different stages of development and supports/funds them
accordingly. Clearly, due to its location, the destinations referred to in this
chapter are unable to tap into the good practice demonstrated by NWDA.
For those that can, however, it is significant that the expectation within
NWDA is that local authorities continue to commit funds on a scale com-
mensurate with previous levels of funding.
The South Warwickshire Tourism Company is a very successful public–
private partnership company limited by guarantee, which retains a loyal
membership base of some 400+ organisations. This includes significant
support from two key ‘honeypot’ attractions and the critical support of
two local authorities. Hence, although widely acclaimed as a leading
organisation of its type, local authority membership and funding are
deemed critical to its success.
Torbay Development Agency, with its wider urban regeneration remit,
is able to take a more holistic view of the development of the pan-
conurbation destination. With its inclusion of an external funding strategy
and a clearly articulated long-term plan it demonstrates a clear sense of
vision and strategic direction for the area. However, it also seeks iconic
and branded hotels in the destination and has difficulty in complementing
the ambitions within the destination with the regional agenda.
Tourism South East adopts an approach that does not actively advocate
destination management ‘partnership’ structures as a solution for tourism
delivery and is one in which local authorities are actively encouraged to
develop the destination at the local level. This approach still involves
effective partnership working and the pooling of resources, but concen-
trates effort at the local level where private and public sector stakeholders
can actually deliver an enhanced tourism product. This ‘bottom up’
approach is at odds with the ‘top down’ regional strategy evident in some
other regions. Visit Brighton has the benefit of working within the regional
structures of Tourism South East where a more ‘bottom up’ approach is
advocated. Brighton has considered going ‘arm’s length’ but the current
view is that the trade is not ready to support such a development – this
despite the increasing pressures on the local authority budget. As with
most other like-minded organisations, Brighton is continuing to adopt a
more commercial stance to its activities as well as retaining its strong links
with the local authority.
Finally, York is significant in that it demonstrates the potential for con-
flict between the regional structure on the one hand and attempts to deliver
a quality tourism product at the local level on the other. York has repre-
sented a model of good practice for many years but is now clearly con-
fronted by regional ambitions that have the potential to negate much good
work conducted by First Stop York and the substantial investment given
over the years by the local authority. The regional structure is not yet set
in stone but the potential for conflict is considerable and demonstrates the
tensions in many parts of the country between the regional and local
standpoints.
The extent to which each of the above cases do in fact represent ‘good
practice’ is open to question and will undoubtedly vary depending upon
one’s viewpoint and how ‘good practice’ is defined in the first instance.
For example, each destination has a different geographic and economic
context as each are unique with regard to their political and socio-cultural
contexts. Likewise, each destination is in receipt of slightly different
markets, be they domestic or overseas, leisure or business, while each des-
tination finds itself at different stages of market maturity. The difficulties
in matching like destinations with like could in fact serve to question the
validity of the methodological approach adopted. This does, however,
stretch things a little too far in that each case presented offers some useful
insights for the management of destinations generally and despite the
significant contextual factors at play, does in fact provide a number of
lessons.
What is abundantly clear, however, is the genuine complexity of the
issue at hand, the management of destinations, and the need for far greater
research in this field of a comparative nature. Notwithstanding this, based
on the evidence gathered for this study, the principal lessons to be drawn
for the future management of destinations in a devolved political context
in England are that:
1 Each destination operates in a unique wider environmental and polit-

ical context and thus no blueprint DMO structure exists for the
generic management of destinations. The variety of approaches in
existence for the management of destinations and the lack of adequate
metrics to measure the effectiveness of each makes the advocacy of
good practice a task beset with difficulty, especially where there are
benefits and drawbacks of both public and private sector interventions.
This is particularly so in the devolved tourism context that exists in
England whereupon all nine RDAs have a slightly different standpoint
vis-à-vis the governance structures for the management of destinations.
The maxim ‘one size fits all’ is clearly not appropriate for the manage-
ment of tourism in England where there are equally good examples of
‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ structures as are there public-driven and
private-driven examples of good practice.
22 A. Fyall et al.
2 Many destinations are facing considerable pressure both on capital and
revenue budgets. Irrespective of structure, the non-statutory nature of
tourism will guarantee continuous scrutiny of public sector funding of
the sector. In view of the public sector’s contribution to all of the des-
tinations mentioned in this chapter, albeit to varying degrees, and the
quite stark year-on-year decline in funding forthcoming in a number of
them, the pressure both on capital and revenue budgets is set to serve
as a major driver for the search for alternative forms of funding, most
likely from the private sector. Even where generous funding has histor-
ically been, and in some cases continues to be, available, the need for
greater economic self-sufficiency and sustainability is clearly on the
not-too-distant horizon. Having said this, it is interesting to note that
irrespective of what structures are proposed for the future manage-
ment of destinations, there is a general view that the public sector will
be expected to commit funds on a scale commensurate with previous
levels of funding.
3 Large capital funds appear more likely to be available when tourism is
more closely allied to wider regeneration programmes. One consistent
finding is the emerging view that a more holistic view of the destina-
tion that recognises the interconnectedness of its component parts and
is more closely allied to wider regeneration programmes is likely to be
received more favourably by those allocating funds. This clearly
appears to be the case in Torbay while much of the future of Black-
pool is inextricably linked to the wider regeneration of the town.
4 All destinations are beginning to adopt a more commercial focus.
When external funding is not easily available or where sources of tra-
ditional external funding are coming to an end, clearly the onus on the
DMO is either to raise income internally via the provision of services
and/or work in partnership with the trade. Although more apparent in
those regions with less ‘pump-prime’ funding available for tourism it is
clear in all destinations that the model adopted by the South Warwick-
shire Tourism Company is one that is likely to feature strongly in the
medium-to-longer term. Having been in existence since 1997 as an
‘arm’s length’ organisation, the mindset of those managing this innov-
ative DMO is totally commercial in orientation and permeates the
entire partnership. This is partly attributed to the personality of the
‘convenor’ as is it also attributable to the way in which the partners
continue to seek the development of the destination and the destina-
tion brand.
5 Partnerships appear to work less well in mature destinations (particu-
larly where financial inducements are less forthcoming). In the early
stages of destination development, or more precisely when tourism is
beginning to be taken more seriously, partnerships appear to emerge
and work more effectively. This is certainly true for Manchester, which
has emerged as an iconic destination over the past decade. In the case
of Marketing Manchester, not only has it continued to grow and
prosper but there remains a genuine commitment from all partners to
the wider development of the Manchester brand. In contrast, York
apart perhaps, traditional destinations of long standing such as
Brighton, Blackpool and Torbay all report that partnership activity is
more problematic to implement. While all three have similar concerns
that they do not easily dovetail with their respective regional strategies,
their scale and span of influence perhaps acting in their favour, all
three do in fact have experience of effective shorter-term partnerships,
albeit with limited, often marketing, focus.
6 Considerable trust is required from the trade to ‘buy in’ to new
structures. The continued success of Marketing Manchester is testa-
ment to the commitment from a large number of local authorities who
clearly believe in the benefits to be accrued from association with the
wider destination. Trust was clearly established at the outset and has
continued to grow with the continued development of Manchester as a
destination. That said, the traumatic aftermath of the IRA bombings
and the benefits to accrue from a successful staging of a major event
such as the Commonwealth Games in 2002 contribute significantly to
the development of ‘goodwill’ and ‘trust’ due to the need to move
forward quickly from disaster and collectively gain a bigger legacy as
is possible from events of the magnitude of the Commonwealth
Games.
7 Key industry players are essential members. To date, York represents a
good example of a partnership inclusive of all key members within the
destination. This is also true of the South Warwickshire Tourism
Company, which has been around for a similar amount of time. One
burgeoning problem for a number of destinations and their attempts
to include all essential stakeholders is the growth of chain hotels in
destinations and their reluctance to participate in destination-building
marketing and management initiatives. This in turn creates ill feeling
among traditional independent hotels that, in many cases, have con-
tributed significant investment in the building and nurturing of desti-
nation brands.
8 A longer-term evolutionary approach to change is recommended rather
than radical change. The cautious stance taken by Tourism South East
in what it refers to as the ‘dogmatic’ approach of some regions in
enforcing ‘top-down’ destination management structures clearly struck
a chord with many of the more established destinations featured in this
study. Where DMOs have gained credence in the sector their evolution
has been slow and gradual and has not been something that came
about overnight. Marketing Manchester, for example, began life as a
Promotions Agency and over time has gradually evolved into a suc-
cessful ‘tourist board’ in its own right. Where change is being con-
sidered, the recommendation from the cases presented in this chapter
24 A. Fyall et al.
is that limited evidence exists to support the rapid instantaneous devel-
opment of new destination management structures.
9 A positive and genuine approach to partnership working is necessary
as is the ability continually to reinvent within a constant cycle of
change. Although prescription, process and procedure are important
contributions to the effectiveness of partnership working, a positive
and genuine approach to partnership working from individuals is also
crucial. This has already been identified in the case of the South War-
wickshire Tourism Company where there exists a widespread recogni-
tion that partnerships are driven by people rather than process and
that partnerships need to change, will change and will continue to
change, if they are to remain relevant to the appropriate stakeholders.
The key to success is to develop an evolutionary collaborative
approach to the management of destinations. The dynamic devolved
‘regional’ environment within which all destinations in England now
find themselves has to some extent encouraged quite drastic change,
which is more revolutionary than evolutionary in nature. Clarity of
objectives, roles and responsibilities are of paramount importance if
new structures are to succeed while time is required for new structures
to bed down. Too much change too quickly in the context of collabo-
ration merely clouds the issue with internal structural and political
battles taking the focus away from the external viewpoint, the visitor.
10 Local authorities are deemed to be, and are to remain, an essential
player in maintaining the neutrality of new organisational structures.
Irrespective of the case in question, the one consistent finding to be
drawn from each is the acceptance that local authorities are to remain
an indispensable delivery partner for DMOs regardless of their struc-
ture. Even in the context of the South Warwickshire Tourism Company
and Marketing Manchester the financial input and overall commitment
from local authorities, and their widely recognised ‘neutrality’ in
keeping the industry on a level keel, is acknowledged as critical to
success. When structural change is being considered, however, there is
broad level agreement that the public sector be expected to commit
funds on a scale commensurate with previous levels of funding.
11 A strong political will that encompasses the need to continue invest-
ment in tourism is required for alternative ‘arm’s length’ structures to
succeed while only marginal savings realistically can be made from the
adoption of such structures. The previous point is particularly of relev-
ance when ‘arm’s length’ structures are being considered or imple-
mented as there is limited evidence to suggest that significant savings
can be made, more that such structures spread more evenly the cost of
destination management and marketing and seek greater ‘buy-in’ from
the trade. Many destinations simply do not have the ‘stomach’ for the
adoption of such an approach to destination management, often in the
form of a company limited by guarantee.
12 A holistic view of the management of the destination is considered par-
amount for the future successful management of destinations. The final
lesson learned from the ‘good practice’ case studies presented is the
need for a broad, inclusive and holistic view of the management of des-
tinations. The decision by Brighton to appoint a visitor/destination
manager is one means by which this can be achieved while the inclusion
of all key stakeholders, including representation from the local com-
munity, is perhaps the most popular solution at this moment in time.
The increasing involvement of the retailing sector in many destinations,
the integration with regeneration activity in Torbay and Blackpool, and
the visitor-economy orientation and cross-border mindset of the South
Warwickshire Tourism Company are all examples of the more holistic
and inclusive approach to the management of destinations.
Conclusion and implications

This chapter identifies a number of forces at play in the external environ-
ment and highlights a number of pressures at the local level that together
are shaping the future organisation of the management of destinations
across England. More than any other macro force for change, the political
devolution and regionalisation of tourism has clearly been an instrumental
driver for new destination management arrangements and poses a number
of quite significant challenges for those managing destinations in the
future. It is in fact possible that each of the nine regions designated DMOs
in England will be different in scale, scope and level of maturity in that
each will reflect their own local or subregional agenda. This applies
particularly to the areas of activity that each of the DMOs decides to take
on board, their level and source(s) of funding and their overall engagement
with the wider regional agenda.
At the subregional and local levels there remains considerable marketing
and brand-building knowledge, as does extensive knowledge of local,
regional, national and international markets. Destination management
systems have often been developed and implemented in many destinations
while many successful partnership arrangements have been in existence for
some time. Hence, the extent to which significant economies are to be
made from new DMO structures does in fact remain an uncertainty for
many local authorities. Furthermore, the view that tourism is a mature
industry and in that sense requires no financial support from the public
sector is a view that to date has not led to any DMOs being funded solely
from private sector funds anywhere in the world. For this reason alone,
economically self-sustaining DMOs remain a utopian ideal.
To conclude, for the foreseeable future, far more extensive research –
both of a practitioner and academic nature – is required in order to identify
those organisational models and funding mechanisms best suited to the
sustainable management of destinations in a devolved regional context as
26 A. Fyall et al.
currently exists in England. Once this has been achieved, the direction of
future research is advised to monitor the operational effectiveness and stra-
tegic impact of such destination management arrangements and to identify
suitable performance metrics both for destinations and for those managing
them; something that to date has proved beyond the scope of those both
managing and researching destinations.
References
Ashworth, G. & Goodhall, B. (1990). Marketing tourism places. New York:
Routledge.
Augustyn, M. M. & Knowles, T. (2000). Performance of tourism partnerships: A
focus on York. Tourism Management, 21(4), 341–351.
Bennett, O. (1999). Destination marketing into the next century. Journal of Vaca-
tion Marketing, 6(1), 48–54.
Bramwell, B. (2006). Actors, networks and tourism policies. In D. Buhalis & C.
Costa (Eds.), Tourism management dynamics: Trends, management and tools
(pp. 155–163). Oxford: Elsevier.
Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism
Management, 21(1), 97–116.
Buhalis, D. & Cooper, C. (1998). Competition or co-operation: The needs of small
and medium sized tourism enterprises at a destination level. In E. Laws, B.
Faulkner & G. Moscardo (Eds.), Embracing and managing change in tourism
(pp. 324–346). London: Routledge.
Dredge, D. (2006). Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism. Tourism
Management, 27(2), 269–280.
Fyall, A. & Garrod, B. (2005). Tourism marketing: A collaborative approach.
Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Fyall, A., Garrod, B. & Tosun, C. (2006). Destination marketing: A framework for
future research. In M. Kozak & L. Andreu (Eds.), Progress in tourism marketing
(pp. 75–86). Oxford: Elsevier.
King, J. (2002). Destination marketing organisations: Connecting the experience
rather than promoting the place. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 8(2), 105–108.
Koutoulas, D. (2004). Benchmark survey of convention and visitors bureaux.
Athens: Greece.
NWDA. (2004). Great destinations: A partnership approach to tourism in Eng-
land’s northwest. Warrington: North West Regional Development Agency.
Palmer, A. & Bejou, D. (1995). Tourism destination marketing alliances. Annals of
Pike, S. (2004). Destination marketing organisations. Oxford: Elsevier.
Prideaux, B. & Cooper, C. (2002). Marketing and destination growth: A symbiotic
relationship or simple coincidence? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9(1), 35–51.
Telfer, D. (2001). Strategic alliances along the Niagara Wine Route. Tourism Man-
agement, 22(1), 21–30.
Wang, Y. & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2007). Collaborative destination marketing: A case
study of Elkhart county, Indiana. Tourism Management, 28(3), 863–875.
WTO. (2002). Thinktank. WTO: Madrid.
WTO. (2004). Survey of destination management organisations. WTO: Madrid.
3 Success factors of tourism
networks
Eduardo Parra-López and
Francisco Calero-García
Introduction
Changes in the highly competitive international tourism industry take place
at a dizzying pace – products and services are continually evolving and
markets are rapidly globalised – forcing businesses continually to seek
more cost-efficient production that does not sacrifice the quality of the
visitor experience in order to gain a competitive edge. To achieve this,
many tourism enterprises have begun collaborating with each other (Cline,
2000), creating solid business structures that optimise the investment of
their assets. For example, in recent work published on this topic Chathoth
and Olsen (2003) identified numerous strategic alliances in the hospitality
industry, Sigala (2004a) analysed the development and the competitive
advantages of collaborative practices among airlines and Morrison, Lynch
and Johns (2004) identified and discussed collaborative processes and their
benefits in a series of tourism networks.
The importance of networks and their role in the development of sus-
tainable management strategies for tourism destinations has also recently
been studied (see Pechlaner, Abfalter & Raich 2002). Due to the increasing
interdependence between all tourism businesses, it has become clear that
the behaviour and operation of enterprises in this industry should be exam-
ined from the perspective of networks. These networks give their members
access to information, resources, markets and technology. In addition to
being an extremely important business resource, partnerships also offer
sustained competitive advantages. Therefore, it is imperative for businesses
operating in a tourism destination like the Canary Islands, where access to
resources has traditionally been difficult (e.g. information on tourist beha-
viour, control over transportation), to create a network as a way to over-
come the competitive disadvantages associated with its remoteness from
the tourists’ home countries (Oreja-Rodríguez, Parra-López & Yanes,
2007).
With this in mind, the objectives of this chapter are to review the impor-
tance and role of networks in increasing the overall competitiveness
of tourism businesses and destinations and to ascertain the factors that
28 E. Parra-López and F. Calero-García
determine the success of collaborative practices. One of the first steps in
meeting this objective was to analyse the literature in tourism in order to
gain a clearer vision of what factors influence the success of tourism busi-
nesses in the Canary Islands. After completing this preliminary analysis, a
previously developed framework was then applied to the context of the
tourism industry in the Canaries in order to evaluate the readiness of
tourism businesses in this region to develop collaborative networks.
Literature review
The “networks” have been studied in various fields of economic research
(e.g. industrial economics, organisation analysis, negotiation theory,
resource dependency, social networks, industrial marketing, entrepreneur-
ship, economic policy and law, operations and value chain research), but
relatively little has been published in the field of tourism (Augustyn &
Knowles, 2000; Morrison et al., 2004; Pechlaner et al., 2002). As a con-
sequence, there is little academic and practical understanding of these net-
works, the factors that determine their success or what they entail for
tourism management. In one of the few works available in this area, Mor-
rison et al. (2004) analysed a number of international tourism networks
and identified a series of factors that were critical to their success. They
concluded that trust was the most important factor because it promotes
and supports the basic, underlying process of a network. Chathorth and
Olsen (2003) also stressed that trust and cooperation are essential to man-
aging a business successfully and maintaining partnerships with other busi-
nesses over long periods of time. These authors also pointed out the need
for more research in this area.
A network is a system of two or more exchange relationships between
organisations that are conceptualised as collective actors (Emerson, 1981).
In other words, a network is a system of connected actors performing dif-
ferent activities while interacting with each other. A network consists of
“nodes” or positions (occupied by diverse actors such as businesses, stra-
tegic business units of diversified firms, trade associations, academics,
public associations and other types of organisations) that manifest their
interest to interact with each other (Thorelli, 1986). These relationships
are not discrete transactions but rather continuous processes (Halinen &
Tornroos, 1995) characterised by three key aspects: (a) the willingness of
the members of the network to invest time and resources into the relation-
ships; (b) partner asymmetries based on the contributions made by each
member and, finally, (c) the belief that collective negotiating will reduce
costs. Therefore, a network can be conceptualised in terms of activities,
resources and actors.
In a research study, Morrison et al. (2004) identified financial, human
and physical resources as factors critical to the success of a network. These
authors also discovered five types of mechanisms that could be used to
Success factors of tourism networks 29
finance a network: (1) public funds and industry sponsorship, (2) public
funds and through its members, (3) public funds, (4) members and spon-
sorship funding, (5) membership and sponsorship and voluntary contribu-
tions in kind.
When working within a network the various actors in the supply chain
can potentially collaborate on any activity, thereby increasing the overall
competitiveness of their operations (Pechlaner et al., 2002; Sigala, 2004a).
For example, the members of a tourism network can collaborate on devel-
oping and designing the tourism product, analysing and managing demand,
developing and managing shared resources, co-producing tourism products
(especially packages of products and services), promoting the network to
other actors operating in the destination, managing tourist services and
positioning and branding the destination. Such cooperation can even
support the development of sustainable and competitive tourism strategies.
In their analysis, Morrison et al. (2004) concluded that the core function
of a network is to allow its members continuously to gain and share know-
ledge, which in turn allows them to develop other activities based on
greater insight, shared information, improved distribution, coordinated
resources, innovation and a better market position. The rationale and
philosophy of the network are “to achieve a community of sustainable
development of the tourism destination with private and public sectors
working in harmony to a commonly accepted function”.
Because it is necessary to have access to knowledge in order to formu-
late timely strategies and actively respond to and influence a dynamic, con-
stantly shifting situation, the success of any organisation competing within
today’s network and knowledge economy depends on its ability to create
and transfer knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Knowledge manage-
ment involves capturing, storing, sharing and using the knowledge that is
created within an organisation and also knowledge acquired from external
sources. Therefore, because tourism businesses (producers) can learn a
great deal from their partners (intermediaries) it is imperative that they
create knowledge networks that help them identify the value of new
information, assimilate it and then jointly apply it to collaborative
practices.
In particular, small tourism businesses are unable to generate all of the
information they need, or process and interpret all of the information they
gather. In other words, a small business responsible for a limited area
within a destination is incapable of predicting trends or understanding
their implications because they have limited information (Pechlaner &
Tschurtschenthaler, 2002); as a consequence, tourism businesses run the
risk of falling behind the latest developments, providing less innovative
products or simply misinterpreting the current situation (Pechlaner et al.,
2002). In order to mitigate these risks all forms of cooperation between
tourism businesses within a destination and also between businesses oper-
ating in different destinations must be analysed, planned and developed
(Augustyn & Knowles, 2000). In addition, tourism networks could export
the knowledge they generate to companies in other industries, while simul-
taneously importing knowledge from them. The exchange of diversified,
complementary knowledge from other fields, regardless of their geographic
location, is crucial now that the preferences, expectations and experiences
of tourists have been globalised (e.g. building customer loyalty depends on
different yield management strategies, including customised, collabora-
tively designed products in which visitors, intermediaries and tourism pro-
ducers all participate); this is a key cross-industry trend that affects all
subsectors and promotes universal preferences in tourism. In this sense,
tourism businesses can learn a great deal by identifying and adopting the
best practices of other industries.
Lynch, Halcro, Johns and Buick (2000) summarised the benefits of
establishing a tourism network in three major categories (see Table 3.1);
(a) learning and exchange, (b) business activity and (c) community. More-
over, according to Skyrme (1999) a knowledge network can also provide
the following benefits:
Table 3.1 Benefits of networks to building profitable tourism destinations
Learning and Knowledge transfer

exchange Tourism education process
Communication
Development of new cultural values
Faster implementation of support agency initiatives
Facilitation of development stage of small enterprises
Business activity Co-operative activities such as marketing, purchasing and
production
Enhanced cross-referral
Encouraging needs-based approaches such as staff development,
policies
Increased number of visitors
Improved use of the resources offered by SMEs and support
agencies
Increased entrepreneurial activity
Extension of tourist season by offering attractive alternatives
Enhanced product quality and visitor experience
Increased commerce between network members
Creation of opportunities for investors and assistance in the
development of their businesses
Community Fostering common purpose and focus
Community support for destination development
Increased or renewed sense of local community
Engagement of small enterprises in destination development
Greater reinvestment in local communities, thereby helping local
populations to integrate
Source: Lynch et al. (2000) and original work of the authors.

• flexibility in the face of market demands – capturing and exchanging
information provides greater understanding of trends, which is critical
to the timely development of innovative tourism products;
• new capabilities derived from the network – knowledge is combined
with other resources in a way that benefits the client and creates new
competitive advantages;
• resources are pooled and collaborative actions are carried out without
sacrificing the independence of each actor;
• improved visitor satisfaction – learning more about the needs and
expectations of tourists allows suitable products to be developed;
• taking advantage of synergies.
Morrison et al. (2004) proposed the following working definition of

tourism networks (which will be adopted by this study), recognising the
importance of knowledge sharing to the success and philosophy of the
network, as well as their diverse benefits:
A set of formal, co-operative relationships between appropriate organ-

isational types and configurations, stimulating inter-organisational
learning and knowledge exchange, and a sense of community and col-
lective common purpose that may result in qualitative and/or quantita-
tive benefits of a business activity, and/or community nature relative to
building profitable and sustainable tourism destination.
Determining the success factors of networks

According to Morrison et al. (2004) the following factors have a great
impact on the success of tourism networks: (a) objectives and purpose, (b)
organisational structure and leadership, (c) resourcing, (d) member engage-
ment, (e) benefits and inter-organisational learning in the network. More-
over, these authors claim that efficient and active engagement between
local managers of tourism destinations and businesses will guarantee inter-
organisational learning and knowledge sharing. Sigala (2004b) also found
that organisational variables such as trust, openness and communication
quality are critical for the development of collaborative networks between
tourism businesses and IT suppliers. In reality, networks have both eco-
nomic and social dimensions that have a great influence on whether or not
the network operates at an optimal level. Collaboration involves economic
goals, such as the scope and impact of the network (Parra-López, 2002),
and also social aspects – in particular, mutual trust and commitment. A
review of the academic literature related to collaboration within networks
or partnerships (Batt & Purchase, 2004; Huemer, 2004; Lee, 2001; Perry,
Sengupta & Kraftel, 2002; Sanzo, Santos, Vazquez & Alvarez, 2003;
Walter, Muller, Helfert & Ritter, 2003) reveals that the success of a
network depends on trust, commitment, good communication and
information sharing, factors that promote and support the development of
a network culture.
Trust is the critical factor in a good relationship (Dwyer, Schurr & Oh,
1987). Anderson and Narus (1990) view trust as the belief that a partner
will only take actions that will lead to positive outcomes and never take
unexpected actions that may have negative results. Moorman, Deshpande
& Zaltman (1993) define trust as the willingness to rely on an exchange
partner in whom one has confidence. In other words, trust is a belief, senti-
ment or expectation that results from the exchange partner’s expertise,
reliability and intentionality. However, trust is also related to the focal
business’ intention to rely on its exchange partner (Parra-López, 2002).
Ganesan (1994) describes this process as “benevolence” because it is based
on the extent to which a business believes that the intentions and motives
of its partners are beneficial to it. A benevolent partner will subordinate
immediate self-interest in exchange for greater competitiveness that bene-
fits both parties in the long run.
In summary, trust has three essential components: (a) the conviction
that partners in the relationship will act “benevolently”, (b) credibility, in
the sense that all parties involved believe that their partners act in good
faith and (c) the belief that partners are capable of benefiting the relation-
ship. Trust consolidates relationships and helps them to function smoothly
by reducing the cost of transactions and fostering the exchange of
information.
Commitment is another factor that plays a part in any long-term rela-
tionship (Dwyer et al., 1987). This term refers to the intention to build and
maintain a lasting relationship. Ganesan (1994) claims that the long-term
relationship provides businesses with sustainable competitive advantages.
The underlying assumption is that such relationships give rise to common
goals and shared risk, which in turn leads to even greater cooperation,
with each partner committed to carrying out their designated functions for
their own benefit and also for the long-term benefit of the relationship.
Information sharing or exchange is understood as the degree to which
critical information is communicated between partners in a network
(Lages, Lages & Lages, 2005). Information sharing is a key element of
knowledge creation and management and it has widely been found that
more frequent and relevant information exchanges result in closer relation-
ships (Batt & Purchase, 2004; Lee, 2001; Sigala, 2004a, b). Information
sharing allows a collaborative tourism network to be effective and sustain-
able over time, because members of the network are not only knowledgea-
ble about each other’s organisation but also about tourism organisations
or entities that can provide clear and transparent data about the evolution
of demand, thereby giving certain actors (hotels, car rental agencies, trans-
portation companies) the flexibility to respond to shifting market demands
(Sigala, 2004a). Therefore, we can hypothesise that information sharing is
a key factor in the success of networks.
Finally, poor communication between partners is a major problem that
should be closely monitored (Mohr & Nevin, 1996). Communication is a
human activity that generates and maintains relationships between the dif-
ferent parties involved. But this process does not simply consist in sending
or receiving information. For communication to take place the sender and
the receiver must continually analyse and decipher each other’s codes in
the proper context. Therefore, communication can be understood as a
bilateral process between the sender and the receiver that seeks to achieve
mutual understanding (Dwyer et al., 1987). Because communication is
considered to be the most important element in business transactions,
highly interactive businesses will spend a great deal of financial resources
in the creation of networks and collaborative environments. On the other
hand, ineffective communication can lead to conflicts due to misunder-
standings and mutual discontent. Overall, communication quality reflects
the nature and degree of formal and informal communication
Methodology
The first objective of this study was to review and analyse the role and
importance of tourism networks in improving the competitiveness of tourism
businesses and destinations and also to identify the factors that determine
the success of tourism networks such as common objectives and purpose,
trust, resource and organisational commitment, information sharing and
communication, following Sigala (2004b). The next objective was to evalu-
ate the overall readiness of tourism businesses located in the Canary Islands
to engage in collaborative practices and develop knowledge networks.
The first step was to design a questionnaire with the assistance of students
from the third and fourth edition of the University of La Laguna’s Master in
Tourism Business Administration. The questionnaire was developed based
on in-depth interviews with managers of tourism businesses and organisa-
tions in the Canaries dealing with the previously discussed success factors of
tourism networks. The first scale included in the questionnaire focused on
the collaborative activities and purpose of networks; responses were meas-
ured using a 1–5 Likert scale, where 1 was “unimportant” and 5 was “very
important”. The second scale centred on the willingness of tourism busi-
nesses to share information, communicate with each other, commit to a rela-
tionship and trust partners (factors that have been discussed in the
theoretical review), again using a Likert scale where 1 was “strongly disa-
gree” and 5 was “strongly agree”. Finally, the respondents were asked to
give information regarding the characteristics of their organisations.
The questionnaire was sent by e-mail and followed up by telephone
from March–June in 2005 and 2006. A total of 182 tourism businesses
responded, of which 92 questionnaires were rejected because they lacked
sufficient data, a response rate of 49.45 per cent (± 5 per cent margin
of error). The response rate was very high compared to other studies
conducted in the Canaries (Spain) on this topic (Parra-López, 2002; Parra-
López & Baum, 2004), which received somewhat lower response rates.
The data were analysed using version 14 of the SPSS statistics programme.
Analysing the opinions of respondents makes it quite easy to determine the
general predisposition of tourism businesses in the Canary Islands (Spain)
to establish networks and to identify the local conditions and factors that
could inhibit the development of a tourism network. Although this study
was designed to capture preliminary data for a much more extensive quali-
tative and quantitative study in the future, the findings can also be useful
to tourism businesses and intermediaries (tour operators and travel agen-
cies). These preliminary results will be analysed and discussed next.
The data regarding organisational profiles reveal that the respondents rep-
resent a wide range of tourism businesses in terms of activity, size and
ownership. The respondents were asked to provide their opinions regard-
ing the importance of taking part in a tourism network (using a 5-point
Likert scale, where 1 was “unimportant” and 5 was “very important”) for
a wide range of activities (see Table 3.2). Although, in general, the data
Table 3.2 Common activities and purpose
Collaborative activities 1 2 3 4 5
Collaborative product design and development 11 24 37 13 5

Joint evaluation of future initiatives and previews of 8 21 24 19 18
their possible impacts
Scope of the collaboration 24 18 23 16 9
Development of collaboration resources (e.g. 8 10 14 18 40
seminars to exchange ideas)
Co-production of tourism products (in particular 9 27 33 13 8
destination packages)
Collaboration in product and destination marketing 2 3 7 34 44
Collaboration in product and brand positioning 4 15 19 25 27
(in his case the Canary Islands)
Joint management of tourism services 7 25 27 19 12
Sharing knowledge, best practices and experiences 14 18 31 15 12
and joint development of collaborative initiatives
Source: Adapted to the case of the Canary Islands (Spain) from Sigala (2004b) and the
authors. The dependency and validity of the scales used, which have already been tested in
other studies (Sigala, 2004b and Morrison et al., 2004), were demonstrated by calculating
Cronbach’s alpha, with all values resulting greater than 0.60.
Notes
1 = unimportant, 5 = very important.
reveal that respondents recognise the importance of engaging in collabora-
tive practices, the lack of importance given to some activities reflects a
selfish attitude and a lack of strategic vision in terms of establishing such
practices.
In contrast, a high percentage of respondents (72 per cent) placed great
importance on developing collaborative resources and practices in a
network. However, these respondents highlighted the fact that although
there is a need to develop the abilities and capabilities of local tourism
businesses, this is impossible due to lack of funds for training programmes
directed at new activities that would make the tourism industry more
competitive.
The realisation of collaborative strategies was not considered very
important despite the fact that they provide various benefits including
reduced prices, economies of scale and greater leverage in negotiations
with suppliers and intermediaries. This may be due to the fact that the
majority of the respondents have built and maintain long-term relation-
ships with local suppliers who help them develop strategies and their busi-
ness culture compels them to respect those relationships.
The respondent’s lack of strategic vision and tendency to think in the
short term is even more evident when examining the importance they
placed on the rest of the activities. In particular, a large percentage of
respondents placed a great deal of importance on the development of col-
laborative practices in marketing, promotion and forecasting demand, but
the co-development of tourism products was practically given no impor-
tance whatsoever. The need integrally to market tourism destinations is a
major concern within the tourism industry (Parra-López, 2002), which
may explain why the respondents placed so much importance on this
aspect. However, individual promotion cannot guarantee continuous, long-
term tourist flows or the development of sustainable tourism for the desti-
nation. On the other hand, the development of innovative tourism products
and unique tourism experiences can improve the long-term competitiveness
and attractiveness of a destination. In order to achieve this – and break
away from mass tourism products – businesses need to collaborate,
exchange and create knowledge based on their experiences and best prac-
tices. However, this was only considered moderately important by the
respondents.
These results can partially be explained by the lack of initiative to
exchange knowledge (see Table 3.3). Table 3.3 provides data on the
respondents’ perceptions and willingness regarding the factors required to
develop and maintain a collaborative network. The respondents gave little
importance to sharing information or communicating with other local tour
operators, or to trust and commitment (mean values are concentrated
around the average value for all items). In other words, the data reveal that
there are limited opportunities to share information and communicate with
other tourism businesses in the Canaries (Spain). This might be caused by
Table 3.3 Respondents’ readiness to take part in a tourism network
α Sig. SD
Information sharing 0.69

I frequently discuss strategic actions with other tourism 2.7 1.03
managers in the Canaries
I don’t mind sharing confidential information with other 2.2 0.90
tourism managers in the Canaries
I rarely speak about my business activities and experiences 2.6 0.95
with other tourism managers in the Canaries
I share the knowledge I acquire with other local tourism 2.5 1.11
operators
I share successes and failures with other local tourism 2.8 1.02
operators
Communication 0.82
I constantly interact and speak with other tourism operators 2.5 1.15
in the Canaries about local, national and international
tourism strategies
There is extensive formal and informal communication about 2.5 1.02
the activities of local and national organisations in the
tourism industry
Tourism operators openly communicate the existence of and/ 2.7 0.99
or their implication in local and national tourism programmes
Commitment 0.77
I believe that over the long run, collaborative relationships 2.8 1.03
with other local tourism operators will be profitable
Maintaining a long-term relationship with other local tourism 3.0 1.12
operators is important for my business
I am willing to make any investment to build and maintain 2.7 1.24
relationships with other local tourism managers
I am willing to make long-term investments in order to build 2.5 1.09
and maintain relationships with other local tourism managers
I am willing to make sacrifices in order to build and maintain 2.5 1.02
relationships with other local tourism managers
Trust 0.75
Other local tourism operators consider how their decisions 1.8 0.91
and activities affect my business
In general, other local tourism operators respect the 2.6 1.02
commitments and agreements that they make
Other local tourism operators are capable of providing 2.8 1.16
confidential information
In general, the local tourism operators can be trusted to carry 3.1 0.89
out joint business ventures
Source: Adapted to the case of the Canary Islands (Spain) from Sigala (2004b) and original
work of the authors based on the results of field work.
Notes
1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree.
factors such as limited time, work pressure during different seasons, lack
of trust and openness between partners in a potential relationship and,
finally, simply being unaware that a network needs to be developed.
However, it should be emphasised that a larger qualitative study must be
carried out in order to understand the true reasons behind this attitude.

We have already pointed out that the competition in the global tourism
industry is growing at a dizzying pace. In this context, our study was
aimed at reviewing and analysing the importance of creating networks to
improve the competitiveness of island-based tourism businesses in general
and for those operating in the Canary Islands (Spain) in particular.
However, in order to develop a successful tourism network in the Canary
Islands (Spain) many factors must be studied, some of which have been
previewed in this chapter. Specifically, the members of a Canary Islands
tourism network must (a) encourage and inspire mutual trust, (b) commit
resources to the network and (c) share information and communicate with
other members. The goal is to create a culture based on knowledge and
information sharing, because collaborative networks are built on sharing
and would fail in its absence.
The findings reveal that although tourism businesses in the Canary
Islands (Spain) have made a great deal of effort to carry out collaborative
strategies in order to achieve competitive advantages, they do not value the
most common collaborative practices, which paints a somewhat pessimis-
tic strategic vision of the industry, especially in terms of activities such as
the joint development of products and knowledge exchange. Similarly, the
respondents’ lack of confidence in networks, the commitment of partners,
knowledge sharing and mutual communication is an enormous challenge
that must be confronted in the near future because these activities need to
be developed. But we firmly believe that the results presented here provide
very valuable information not only for tourism businesses in the Canaries,
but also for destination administrators and business associations; this
information can aid in the creation of more stable and competitive destina-
tions. Although it is evident that there are significant barriers to the imple-
mentation of the collaborative model that has been presented here, the fact
is that, despite their lack of interest in sharing knowledge and experiences,
tourism businesses in the Canaries have already carried out joint strategies
and this could serve as a solid foundation for change in the future.
In conclusion, it must be emphasised that although this work has cap-
tured relevant and useful information, it is only preliminary data; a much
more extensive qualitative and quantitative study must be carried out in
the future (e.g. confirmatory factorial analysis) to lay the groundwork for
a competitive tourism model for insular destinations in a global context.
References
Anderson, J. C. & Narus, J. A. (1990). A model of distributor firm and manufac-
turing firm working relationships. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 42–58.
Augustyn, M. & Knowles, T. (2000). Performance of tourism partnerships: A focus
on York. Tourism Management, 21, 341–351.
Batt, P. & Purchase, S. (2004). Managing collaboration within networks and rela-
tionships. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 169–174.
Chathoth, P. & Olsen, M. (2003). Strategic alliances: A hospitality industry per-
spective. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 22, 419–434.
Cline, R. S. (2000). E-commerce: The pace picks up. Hotels, 34, 71.
Dwyer, F., Schurr, P. & Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer–seller relationships.
Journal of Marketing, 51, 11–27.
Emerson, R. M. (1981). Social exchange theory. In M. Rosenberg & R. Turner
(Eds.), Social psychology: Sociological perspectives (pp. 30–65). New York: Basic
Books.
Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long term orientation in buyer–seller relation-
ships. Journal of Marketing, 32, 1–19.
Halinen, A. & Tornroos, J. A. (1995). The meaning of time in the study of indus-
trial buyer–seller relationships. In K. Moller & D. Wilson (Eds.), Business mar-
keting: An interaction and network perspective (pp. 493–529). Norwell, MA:
Kluwer Academic.
Huemer, L. (2004). Balancing between stability and variety: Identity and trust
trade-offs in networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 251–259.
Lages, C., Lages, C. R. & Lages, L. (2005). The RELQUAL scale: A measure of
relationship quality in export market ventures. Journal of Business Research, 58,
1040–1048.
Lee, J. N. (2001). The impact of knowledge sharing, organizational capability and
partnership quality on IS outsourcing success. Information and Management, 38,
323–335.
Lynch, P. A., Halcro, K., Johns, N. & Buick, I. (2000). Developing small and
micro-enterprise networks to build profitable tourist destinations. Destination
Development Conference, ETOUR, Mid-Sweden University, Ostersund, Sweden.
Mohr, J. & Nevin, J. (1996). Collaborative communication in interfirm relation-
ships: Moderating effects of integration and control. Journal of Marketing, 60,
103–115.
Morrisson, A., Lynch, P. & Johns, N. (2004). International tourism networks.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16, 197–202.
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. How Japa-
nese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Oreja-Rodríguez, J. R., Parra-López, E. & Yanes-Estévez, V. (2007). The sustaina-
bility of islands destinations: Tourism area life cycle and teleological perspec-
tives. The case of Tenerife. Tourism Management, 29, 53–65.
Parra-López, E. (2002). Determinantes estratégicos para obtención de ventajas
competitivas en el canal de distribución de servicios turísticos. Universidad de La
Laguna: Servicio de Publicaciones.
Parra-López, E. & Baum T. G. (2004). An analysis of supply-side relationships in
small island destinations: The role of tour-operators, travel agencies and tourism
transport in the Canary Islands. Tourism and Hospitality: Planning and Devel-
opment, 1, 201–218.
Pechlaner, H., Abfalter, D. & Raich, F. (2002). Cross-border destination manage-
ment systems in the Alpine Region: The role of knowledge network on the
example of Alpnet. In R. Bouncken & S. Pyo (Eds.), Knowledge management in
hospitality and tourism (pp. 89–107). New York: The Haworth Hospitality
Press.
Pechlaner, H. & Tschurtschenthaler, P. (2002). Tourism policy, tourism organiza-
tions and change management in alpine regions and destinations. A European
Perspective in Current Issues in Tourism.
Perry, M., Sengupta, S. & Kraftel, R. (2002). Effectiveness of horizontal strategic
alliances in technologically uncertain environments: Are trust and commitment
enough? Journal of Business Research, 5871, 1–6.
Sanzo, M., Santos, M., Vazquez, R. & Alvarez, L. (2003). The effect of market ori-
entation on buyer–seller relationship satisfaction. Industrial Marketing Manage-
ment, 32, 327–345.
Sigala, M. (2004a). Collaborative supply chain management in the airline sector:
The role of GDS. Advances in Hospitality Leisure, 1, 103–121.
Sigala, M. (2004b). The ASP-Qual model: Measuring ASP service quality in Greece.
Managing Service Quality, 14, 103–114.
Skyrme, D. (1999). Knowledge networking: Creating the collaborative enterprise.
Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Thorelli, H. B. (1986). Networks: Between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Man-
agement Journal, 7, 37–51.
Walter, A., Muller, T., Helfert, G. & Ritter, T. (2003). Functions of industrial sup-
plier relationships and their impact on relationship quality. Industrial Marketing
Management, 32, 159–169.
4 Strategic positioning and
performance of tourism
destinations
Ruggero Sainaghi
Introduction
European snow tourism, after a long development stage (Cockerell, 1994;
Spring, 1998), is subject to increasing competition. It is indeed, a market
characterised by low growth rates (Fredman & Heberlein, 2003) and it has
been faced with continuing expansion of supply driven both by the creation
of new destinations and by the growth in available resources at those already
in existence (Flagestad & Hope, 2001; Gaido, 1998; Hudson, 2000). In this
context many destination operators (businesses, associations, destination
management organisations (DMOs)) are undecided as to the strategy to be
adopted to maintain or increase their own market share and above all, as to
how to create a sustainable competitive advantage (Porter, 1985).
The issue is of great importance because the already delicate economic–
financial equilibrium of the ski corporations is being further eroded by the
new rules of the game. Indeed there are many causes that have contributed
to a significant increase in operational costs and investments – reduction in
snowfall (Agnew & Viner, 2001; Perry, 2000; Wall, 1992) and the conse-
quent development of planned snow making (Scott, McBoyle & Mills,
2003), the increased investment costs for modern transport, the growing
staff and energy costs and the increased cost of maintaining ski run safety
and environmental integrity (Hudson & Miller, 2005) including to mini-
mise the risks of avalanches (Peters & Pikkemaat, 2005). At the same time
there is also reduced room for manoeuvre in terms of real prices, the two
factors combining to reduce the profitability of invested capital.
Other contributors to the debate have emphasised how these challenges
are difficult to meet, with some exceptions, by recourse to business com-
petition strategies alone, rather requiring an appropriate strategy at the
destination level (Ritchie & Crouch, 2000; Ritchie & Ritchie, 1999). Such
a strategy requires the combined efforts of public and private players, with
the role of the DMOs having particular importance (Blain, Levy & Ritchie,
2005; Bieger, 1997; Dredge, 2006).
Nonetheless, the formulation and implementation of a deliberate desti-
nation strategy (Mintzberg & Waters, 1985) appears to be difficult to
Strategic positioning and performance 41
achieve, above all in view of the complex and multisector form taken
not only by local skiing facilities and services but above all, by the hospi-
tality facilities. This is typical of a community model that is often charac-
terised by a degree of friction between the different local players (Sainaghi,
2003; Sheehan & Ritchie, 2005), particularly between ski corporations,
the tourist hospitality businesses and local councils (responsible for the
planning use of the land). These conflicts and the inevitable divisions
arising from them in many cases prevent concentration on a destination
strategy with action plans based more on short-term policies and tactics,
unable to create or consolidate the foundations of a competitive
advantage.
This takes this debate forward and, starting from empirical evidence, is
concentrated on the links existing between a winter destination’s competit-
ive position and the performance of the ski corporations and the tourist
hospitality firms. This approach demonstrates clearly that the lack of a
destination strategy in providing dynamic regulation (i) of the structural
balances between ski-lift capacity and the availability of high turnover hos-
pitality facilities and (ii) of the destination commercial mix, with particular
attention to the division between flows originating from daily and multi-
day ski passes, tends to give rise to a positioning characterised by low-level
and not sustainable performance that is also hard to sustain.
Literature review
The literature has, over time, defined the concept of “destination” as both
a system of attractions and the geographic area that encompasses them,
identified on the basis of the range of needs of intermediate or final cus-
tomers (Leiper, 1995). In the European context winter destinations operate
principally in the Alpine region, serving a target customer group interested
in sport, skiing being of particular importance. For this reason Bieger
(1997) refers specifically to “winter sports destination” (italics added).
The Alpine destinations display the characteristics typical of the com-
munity model (Bodega, Cioccarelli & Denicolai, 2004). It is a model with
a fragmented supply side, centred on independent SMEs “operating in a
decentralised way and where no unit has any dominant administrative
power or dominant ownership within the destination” (Flagestad & Hope,
2001, p. 452). This fragmentation is reflected in the structural complexity
of the strategic positioning sought by local businesses and by potentially
conflicting views of the course the destination should take in its future
development (Buhalis, 2000; Williams, Gill & Chura, 2004). On the other
hand one often finds a sense of shared values at these destinations, an
indispensable point of departure for any dialogue between operators. Pre-
cisely such characteristics have led a number of authors to describe “com-
munity based” destinations as “tourist districts” (Dredge, 1999; Sainaghi,
2004, 2006).
42 R. Sainaghi
Of the many types of businesses operating within a winter destination,
this chapter is concentrated on ski corporations and tourist accommoda-
tion businesses. This choice is linked, on the one hand, to the central
importance of ski services in the choices made by winter customers and, on
the other, by the importance that the hospitality sector has in attracting the
end customer. Indeed, anticipating some of the empirical evidence to be
presented in more complete form later in the chapter, the most interesting
customer demand for Alpine destinations is represented by skiers staying a
number of nights as opposed to day trippers – hence the concentration on
the dual elements accommodation–ski corporation. The accommodation
structures are primarily responsible for shaping the destination’s commer-
cial mix rather than the businesses operating the ski plant.
The other local businesses, the so-called “local tourism organisations”
(LTOs) are restaurants, entertainment, transport and banking services,
public services and so on. While playing an important role in the comple-
tion of the global product required by the end customer and hence in
laying down the conditions for the consolidation of loyalty and word-of-
mouth circuits (Molteni & Sainaghi, 1997), they rarely offer services that
can be described as core.
Concentration on ski corporations and the tourist accommodation
sector highlights an imbalance in the cost structure towards fixed costs
(staff, energy and amortisation) combined with a high level of invested
capital. These conditions make the management of the operating leverage
particularly important, given that marginal cost is almost negligible (above
all in the case of ski corporations).
The dynamic management of two pivotal elements is thus important for
the destination: (i) the management of the commercial mix in order to opti-
mise sales volumes and (ii) the infrastructural balance between high turno-
ver guest beds and the hourly capacity of functional plant given the high
degree of interdependence between the two sectors.
With reference to the mix selection aimed at by the destination (whether
deliberately or emergent), while accepting a degree of polarisation and sim-
plification of the data, what appears of particular importance is the destina-
tion’s positioning with regard to customer segments represented by day
trippers and tourists (Hunt & Layne, 1991). This means that focusing on
short-term custom will tend to optimise volumes during holidays (typically
weekends, Christmas, Carnival and Easter) while also laying the foundations
for reduced levels of operation in the destination during weekdays. Further-
more, these flows tend to fluctuate widely depending on climatic conditions,
with sharp falls in numbers during bad weather. On the contrary, concentra-
tion on longer stay custom (ideally weekly) reduces the variation in flows
between weekdays and holidays. Furthermore, the greater complexity of the
needs of the long-stay customer has important knock-on effects for the other
businesses operating in the destination (LTOs). This customer segment is less
sensitive to deteriorating weather conditions because of the increased length
of stay and tends to be prepared to accept the risk of bad weather. A person
buying a multi-day ski pass tends to be prepared to pay for the service even
on those days when he or she is not actually able to ski.
With reference to the structural balances internal to the destination, the
ratio between the ski plant’s hourly capacity and the availability of high-
turnover bed spaces is of central importance. It is obvious that where the
ratio is too high with respect to hourly capacity, the insufficient accommo-
dation means that short-stay customers are sought to fill the capacity and
when the ratio is too low, the destination risks offering reduced skiing
capacity with long queues at the ski lifts or too many people on the runs.
Methodology
The aim of the empirical research has been to confirm the following
hypotheses: clear positioning on longer-stay customers makes it more likely
that the conduct of ski corporations and hotel businesses will compliment
each other, improves the competitive performance of the ski corporations
and improves the competitive performance of tourist hospitality businesses.
The multiple case study methodology (Yin, 1984; Eisenhardt, 1989) has
been adopted as a means of testing these hypotheses, with the use of a
combination of qualitative and quantitative data although giving greater
weight to the quantitative sources. The sample is made up of nine ski
resorts forming part of the Valtellina, an Italian Alpine region specialising
in mountain tourism, winter tourism in particular. The Skiing World
Championships were held there in 1985 and 2005 as well as a number of
races in the World Cup and the Ski World Final (March 2008).
The importance of the cases is essentially to be put in relation to the dif-
ferences of the resorts in the following characteristics: (i) the size of the
resort (see Table 4.1), (ii) the winter customer target group served, (iii)
their respective distances from their demand catchment areas and (iv) their
mix of available accommodation. All the destinations have a high degree
of community participation in tourism planning and management.
The geographic positioning reflects a better proximity to the catchment
area for Madesimo, Gerola, Valmalenco, Teglio and Aprica, easily reacha-
ble in particular for clients coming from Milan. The other locations are
farther, either in terms of kilometres or, primarily, in terms of time. The
geographic positioning has got some implications on the mix per national-
ity: locations closest to Milan tend to present a stronger weight of Italians,
while the ones that are farthest are opened to international custom, with
the partial exception of Valmalenco. Furthermore, destinations closest to
Milan present a bigger frequency of daily passes (more than 55 per cent).
A variety of sources of information were used in the case study research
especially participant observation and quantitative data in particular.
A three-year database was set up for each ski corporation containing the
following data: (i) turnover, (ii) first entries (first use of ski passes) and
Table 4.1 Sample description, commercial mix and strategic positioning
2004/05 Teglio Gerola Chiesa V. Valdidentro Madesimo* Bormio** Aprica Livigno Valfurva Valtellina
Hotels
Number of hotels 6 4 33 19 31 63 22 105 31 277
Hotel beds 370 130 1,466 1,072 1,712 3,628 1,223 5,011 1,883 14,242
Significance of holiday Low Low High High High High High Low High –
homes
Ski corporations
Number of tickets 1,713 18,317 117,251 15,555 – 123,486 101,233 233,849 42,628 609,691
Passages 20,654 – 1,460,697 715,850 – 3,044,238 2,659,264 12,112,527 42,628 19,992,576
First entries 1,713 20,870 171,465 64,539 – 315,753 195,655 922,290 108,687 1,690,572
2004/05 Teglio Gerola Chiesa V. Valdidentro Madesimo*†† Bormio**† Aprica Livigno Valfurva
Hotel overnights
Italians 83% 59% 49% 50% 59% 56% 74% 38% 59%
Foreigners 17% 41% 51% 50% 31% 44% 26% 62% 41%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Iki demand (first entries)
Day tickets 100% 67% 57% 32% 60% 23% 34% 11% 6%
Multi-day tickets 0% 10% 24% 33% 25% 47% 51% 82% 71%
Season tickets 0% 22% 19% 35% 15% 30% 15% 7% 23%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Individual 100% 100% 71% 81% 70% 73% 66% 73% 68%
Agency and TO 0% 0% 29% 19% 30% 27% 34% 27% 32%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Notes
*Madesimo and Campodolcino.
** Bormio and Valdisotto.
† Excluding first entries on 2004/05 21-day ski passes given free of charge to World Cup volunteers.
†† Figures estimated based on direct interviews with ski corporation management.
(iii) passages (total ski-pass use) broken down by type of ski pass sold, by
type of sales channel and by type of customer.
The results of the analysis undertaken demonstrate the differences between
the strategic positioning of the sample considered and the influence this has
on the performance of the local businesses and on the relations established
between ski corporations and the hospitality businesses. It was then imme-
diately obvious that it would be of assistance to draw up a map showing
strategic segmentation as a means of classifying the winter destinations
involved and to assist interpretation in the analysis of the different indic-
ators proposed (see below). The importance of the positioning decisions
made by the destinations were then analysed in relation to their effect on:
(i) the correlation between ski corporation and hotel flows, (ii) on the com-
petitive results of ski corporations and (iii) the performance of accommo-
dation businesses.
Strategic positioning of the winter destinations

Anticipating the conclusions to be set out in greater detail later in this
chapter, the empirical research suggests that (i) the size of the ski corpora-
tion and (ii) the proportionate weight of long-stay customers are factors of
central importance in determining the positioning for winter destinations.
Using these two variables it is possible to construct a matrix detailing four
different levels of positioning (Figure 4.1).
Livigno (19
million; 82%)
�3 million
Madesimo (7.5 million; 25%)

Bormio (5.7 million; 47%)
Turnover
4 Aprica (3.3 million; 51%) 1

3 2
Chiesa Val. (2.6 million; 24%)
<3 million
Valfurva (1.8 million;

71%)
Valdidentro (0.7 million; 33%)
Gerola (0.3 million; 10%)
Teglio (0.1 million; 0%)
<50% �50%
Percentage first entry multi-day ski passes, excluding

season passes
Figure 4.1 Sample description, commercial mix and strategic positioning.

46 R. Sainaghi
The destinations within the first square dispose of what is in some
respects, an optimum strategy. They are able to offer extensive supply in
terms of skiing capable of attracting prevalently long-stay customers gener-
ating the most important part of the local ski corporations’ turnover, pas-
sages and first entries. With regard to the sample examined here, Livigno is
clearly within this square while Bormio and Aprica, although coming
within the same square, are nearer the border with the fourth square.
Those destinations coming within the second square are characterised
by reduced resources in terms of ski plant but have still managed to find a
positioning on the long-stay market. This means that the “white week”
customer segment does not have to be the sole preserve of those resorts
with an extensive range of ski plant. This positioning can be sustained by
factors identified as competitive advantages: a particularly attractive price
system, the development of networking with nearby ski resorts so custom-
ers are able to use other runs, clear positioning on the beginners’ market
(not sensitive to the range of slopes available) or on customers not inter-
ested solely in skiing, a particularly beautiful natural environment that may
compensate the repetitive nature of the slopes for the long-stay customers.
The third square identifies the most fragile strategic positioning – these
are the destinations with limited skiing aimed primarily at day-tripper cus-
tomers. Their competitive advantage is often based on their proximity to
important demand catchment areas with consequential increase in day
trips. The resulting flow model is highly seasonal in nature with peaks on
holidays and in good weather and reduced volumes on weekdays and in
bad weather. The high degree of variation in skiing days then reduces the
beneficial effects both for the accommodation sector and, more generally,
for all the collateral activities present in the destination (the LTOs).
Finally, the fourth square includes those destinations that, while being
able to offer a wide range of skiing, have an unbalanced customer mix
with an over-large day-tripper component. In this case too, there is a high
degree of variation in flows between holidays and weekdays with effects of
limited benefit on the accommodation sector and the other services collat-
eral to skiing.
Accommodation and plant

A correlation was made for all destinations for which detailed information
was available, between the theoretical numbers of skiing days (multiplying
the number of ski passes issued by their duration) and the number of hotel
guests. The data, set out in Table 4.2 (first part), demonstrate the high
degree of correlation (index equal to, or greater than, +0.6) existing on
average between skiing days and hotel guests. This means that there is an
overlap between skiers and hotel guests.
The correlation is however weak and insignificant in those destinations
positioned in the third square of the matrix – Teglio (0.11), Gerola (0.27)
and Chiesa V. (–0.13). So far as the other resorts are concerned, values are
very high for those within the first and second squares – Livigno (0.98),
Aprica (0.68) and Valfurva (0.90). Bormio, placed as it is close to the edge
of the third and fourth squares, also has a high value (0.94). Valdidentro is
the only resort in the fourth square that has a high and significant value
(0.74). This is indeed not surprising in that the proportion of multi-day
first entries in this resort is 33 per cent. All the other destinations included
in this group have much lower values.
At this point the correlation analyses were repeated, dividing up first
entries according to their duration, distinguishing between ski passes of
less than two days, passes equal to or greater than two days and seasonal
passes (Table 4.2, second part). Chiesa in Valmalenco was excluded
because data were not available detailing the type of pass – the informa-
tion from which the duration can be established.
Turning our attention to ski passes of more than two days, there is a
positive correlation in all resorts in the sample, which is both high and
significant. This means that when the destination’s mix is clearly posi-
tioned on the multi-day market, there are extensive synergies to be gained
between the accommodation sector and the ski corporations. It is interest-
ing to note that even in those resorts positioned in squares three and four
the correlation indices are extremely high and significant – Gerola (0.72),
Valdidentro (0.90). Given the importance of this market, the longer-stay
flows were broken down further in order to distinguish between the indi-
vidual and agency (tour operator) customer (Table 4.2, third part).
One of the first characteristics to emerge from this analysis is that all the
main sample resorts are prevalently positioned on the individual longer-
stay customer with the exception of Valdidentro (where the proportion of
organised tourism is 50 per cent) and Aprica (63 per cent).
The correlation values are on average very high for both channels
although there are still a number of important differences. The figures
indeed indicate that hotels in some destinations have very different atti-
tudes to cooperation with organised tourism.
Thus, Bormio has a very high value for individual multi-day passes
(0.93) while the figure for the organised channel is less but still significant
(0.63). The difference can be explained by the tendency by agencies to use
flats owned by local residents rather than hotels that are generally unhappy
about collaborating with flows negotiated by tour operators because it
leads to a reduction of average prices with respect to individual customers.
The case of Valfurva is similar where a high level of resistance to organised
tourism can be demonstrated (correlation index of 0.63).
The cases of Valdidentro (second square) and Aprica (first square) show
behaviour that is exactly the opposite of the above. Agencies and tour
operators collaborate for the most part with hotels (indices of 0.90 and
0.98 respectively) while ski days of individual tourism are of less impor-
tance (0.72 and 0.63), not relevant for Aprica.
Table 4.2 Empirical findings
Teglio Gerola Chiesa V. Valdidentro Madesimo Bormio Aprica Livigno Valfurva

(2003–05) (2003–05) (2003–05) (2002–05) (2003–05) (2002–05) (2004–05) (2002–05) (2002–05)
First entries 0.11*** 0.27*** – 0.74 – 0.94 0.68*** 0.98 0.90

Passages – – –0.13*** – – – – – –
Gerola Valdidentro Bormio Aprica Livigno Valfurva
(2003–05) (2002–05) (2002–05) (2004–05) (2002–05) (2002–05)
Correlations
<2 days 0.41*** 0.43*** 0.78 0.56*** 0.72 0.69
Season tickets –0.51*** 0.71 0.75 –0.90*** 0.84 0.90
2 days 0.72 0.90 0.91 0.99 0.97 0.86
First entry mix
<2 days 66% 34% 24% 34% 12% 7%
Season tickets 25% 45% 28% 15% 7% 26%
2 days 9% 31% 48% 51% 81% 68%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Gerola Valdidentro Bormio Aprica Livigno Valfurva
(2003–05) (2002–05) (2002–05) (2004–05) (2002–05) (2002–05)
Correlations
2 days Individuals 0.75 0.72 0.93 0.63*** 0.94 0.90
 days Agencies – 0.90 0.63 0.98 0.96 0.63
First entry mix
2 days Individuals 100% 50% 69% 37% 68% 59%
2 days Agencies 0% 50% 31% 63% 32% 41%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Teglio Gerola Chiesa V. Valdidentro Bormio Aprica Livigno Valfurva
(2003–05) (2003–05) (2003–05)† (2002–05) (2002–05) (2004–05)† (2002–05) (2002–05)
Christmas influence
Christmas* 55% 18% 18% 26% 19% 19% 11% 15%
Other periods 45% 82% 82% 74% 81% 81% 89% 85%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Weekend influence
WE** 82% 63% 52% 47% 38% 36% 26% 35%
Midweek** 18% 37% 48% 53% 62% 64% 74% 65%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Seasonality month
Monthly average (/000) 1 4 334 19 66 481 190 22
Monthly variance (/000) 1 2 175 8 24 286 67 67
Variance/average 0.90 0.61 0.53 0.44 0.36 0.60 0.35 0.36
Seasonality day
Daily average (/000) 37 147 11,793 771 2,118 15,184 6,089 790
Daily variation (/000) 75 190 10,651 597 1,097 12,097 3,290 420
Variance/average 2.03 1.29 0.90 0.77 0.52 0.80 0.54 0.53
Notes
* Christmas: always from 25/12 to 06/01.
** Excluding Christmas period.
*** Pairwise Correlations p > 0.05.
† Figures relate to passage rather than first entry
50 R. Sainaghi
Finally in Livigno, there does not seem on average to be much difference
in the acceptance rates of individual and organised tourism. The correla-
tion indices are very high in both cases (0.94 and 0.96). This means that
the customer mix served by the hotels is in line with that served by the
plant – 68 per cent individual customers and 32 per cent organised
customers.
The figures explained above clearly suggest both in detail and taken as a
whole, that it is above all the strategic positioning sought by the destina-
tion (deliberate or emergent) that creates a high degree of synergy or, on
the contrary, leads to a degree of dislocation, between the accommodation
sector and ski corporations. In this positioning the segmentation of flows
according to length of stay remains of primary importance even if not the
only factor. This then confirms the first hypothesis.
Destination positioning and ski corporation performances

A number of indicators were taken into consideration in order to measure
the seasonality of flows: (i) the incidence of flows originating during the
Christmas period compared with the seasonal total, (ii) the percentage of
flows (first entry or passages) on weekdays (Monday to Friday inclusive)
and on weekends (Saturday and Sunday) throughout the winter, with the
exception of the Christmas period, (iii) volume distribution (first entries or
turnover) achieved in each month and (iv) on each day (Table 4.2, fourth
part).
The various indicators clearly show the impact that strategic positioning
of a destination has on seasonality. The destinations included in squares
one and two show, on average, less seasonality, considering the different
indexes, than those destinations included in squares three and four. The
seasonal profiles of destinations three show higher concentrations, with
extremely high flow figures recorded at weekends, and thus high daily,
weekly and monthly variance. Flows originating during Christmas oscillate
between 18 per cent (Gerola and Chiesa V.) and 55 per cent (Teglio), while
the figures for destinations included in squares one and two vary from 11
per cent (Livigno) to 19 per cent (Aprica).
One can therefore conclude that the second hypothesis is true: the posi-
tioning of the destination has a significant influence on the competitive per-
formance of ski corporations.
Destination positioning and hotel performance

Hotel performance was analysed using only information relating to occu-
pancy flows. It was not possible to measure economic performance above
all because of the large number of businesses not required to file their
financial statements. Even though constrained by this simplification of the
data, the results set out in Table 4.3 allow a number of conclusions to be
Table 4.3 Destination positioning and hotels’ competitive performance
Average 2002/05
Teglio
Gerola
Chiesa V.
Valdidentr
Media Q3
Madesimo*
Bormio**
Av. Q4
Aprica
Livigno
Av. Q1
Valfurva
Av. Q2
Valtellina
Size
Arrivals 1,410 647 15,653 13,681 7,848 24,709 47,362 36,036 16,811 81,933 49,372 21,822 21,622 246,089
Length of stays 1.9 3.3 4.1 3.8 3.9 4.2 4.4 4.4 4.5 5.7 5.5 5.2 5.2 4.7
Overnight stays 2,635 2,153 64,804 52,502 30,523 104,157 210,138 157,148 75,963 271,198 112,952 112,952 1,166,454
Hotel beds 376 130 1,533 978 754 1,655 3,756 2,706 1,227 4,938 3,082 1,916 12,916 18,052
Occupancy
Occupancy (151 days) (%) 4.6 11.0 28.0 35.5 26.8 41.7 37.1 38.5 40.7 62.6 58.3 39.0 39.0 43.8
Hotels – ski corporations
1st entries 2 days 0 2,133 41,336 21,020 16,122 n.a. 156,708 156,708 100,007 756,179 428,093 75,496 75,496 1,152,879
2005 (A)
Hotel beds 2005 (B) 370 130 1,458 1,072 758 1,712 3,649 2,680 1,230 5,025 3,128 1,894 1,894 18,084
Ratio (A/B) – 16.4 28.4 19.6 21.3 n.a. 43.0 58.5 81.3 150.5 136.9 39.9 39.9 63.8
Notes
* Madesimo and Campodolcino.
** Bormio and Valdisotto.
52 R. Sainaghi
drawn in relation to: (i) the size of the sector (number of bed spaces and
flow size), ii) the extent of use of productive capacity (occupancy) and (iii)
the ratio between first entries and bed spaces.
Dealing first with size, the smallest resorts in terms of hotel bed spaces
are those in square three with average unit size of 754 beds. As one would
expect, this is followed by the second square (1,916 beds). These resorts
are those concentrating on longer-stay customers but with a limited range
of skiing facilities. The fourth square has an average size of 2,706 beds. It
is interesting to note that the decidedly greater length of ski lifts available
to resorts in square four in comparison to square two is not reflected in the
increased number of hotel beds. This asymmetry can be explained by the
prevalent positioning on shorter-stay customers. Finally, the first square
has the highest average number with 3,082 beds.
Two conclusions can thus be drawn with reference to size: (i) those
resorts that have more extensive skiing facilities (squares four and one)
have a larger number of hotel beds available and (ii) those resorts with a
customer mix weighted most heavily towards longer-stay customers
(squares one and two) have greater hotel facilities. This means that when
the skiing facilities in different destinations are the same, greater benefits
can be obtained from them by the hotel sector when concentration is
focused on longer-stay customers. This provides further confirmation of
the first hypothesis.
Occupancy levels too show behaviour in line with what has already
been observed with regard to beds. The lowest rates are those of the third
square (26.8 per cent). This is followed by the resorts in the fourth square
(38.5 per cent), the second (33.8 per cent) and the first (58.3 per cent).
The third indicator clearly shows the strategic link between three
factors: plant extension, hotel beds and the resort’s positioning on longer-
stay customers. The ratio between multi-day first entries and bed numbers
provides a summary measure of these three factors. Resorts in the third
square have low levels (21.3 first entries for each hotel bed). The values are
higher in the second square (39.9) and again in the fourth (58.5), with the
highest figures achieved in the first square (136.9).
It can thus be concluded that decisions made with reference to commer-
cial positioning (customer mix) at a destination level, also have an objec-
tive impact on the size of the accommodation sector and its occupancy
rate. This thus confirms the third hypothesis.

The empirical evidence indicates the need to ensure the involvement of a
number of local parties from both the public and private sectors, capable
of having a bearing on the destination positioning. Local councils are
mainly called upon to conduct a dynamic monitoring of the ratio between
the hourly capacity of the ski lifts and bed spaces, giving the greatest pos-
sible encouragement to accommodation having a beneficial effect on the
ski corporations (high turnover). The most common error is that of
encouraging the demand for second homes (flats not owned by residents),
which tend to generate high, one-off, short-term income (the capital gains
obtained from the sale of land or flats) but that significantly reduce
medium- and long-term benefits for the resort.
DMOs are normally the bodies with responsibility for communication
and the development of new products. It is important that the resort mar-
keting strategy should look primarily for longer-stay customers to consoli-
date the positive and reciprocal benefits to be gained from this by both the
accommodation and ski sectors. Such dual development can give rise to
interesting openings for other LTOs. The development of new products
must also be directed as much as possible towards the resolution of specific
occupancy problems and the consolidation and development of the desti-
nation brand in the eyes of the market and the target customer groups.
The role of the ski corporations is of key importance since they are
responsible for the content of the central service for winter holidays. To be
able to attract the longer-stay customers it is necessary to give particular
attention to plant and slope maintenance as well as to collateral services.
They need to put pressure on local councils and DMOs for the creation of
the right infrastructural balances and the adoption of the appropriate des-
tination marketing techniques. Where this is possible it is important to
increase resources to offer their customers an extensive choice of plant and
ski runs. They must also give thought to the co-habitation of different
target groups, particularly long-stay customers and day trippers. The over-
lapping of these groups must be assessed with care in order to avoid over-
crowding on the ski runs and ski lifts, often not well tolerated by
longer-stay customers.
Finally, the accommodation sector has a direct effect on the destina-
tion’s commercial mix above all when deciding which customer segment to
target. Thus the knock-on effect for the ski corporations of giving priority
to weekend custom will be very different from the effects of favouring
longer-term guests. The customer’s main requirement in visiting will also
have a significant effect on the skiing facilities. The effects will be particu-
larly strong if the accommodation sector attracts “pure” skiers; less notice-
able if the guests are only occasional skiers and virtually non-existent if
they are interested in other sports. The degree to which organised tourism
is accepted or rejected is also very important. From the destination’s point
of view, the best commercial mix is one that is neither concentrated exclu-
sively on the individual customer nor on organised holidays.
References
Agnew, M. & Viner, D. (2001). Potential impact of climate change on interna-
tional tourism. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(1), 37–60.
54 R. Sainaghi
Bieger, T. (1997). Management von destinationen und tourismusorganisationen
(Dritte Auflage). München/Wien: Oldenburg.
Blain, C., Levy, S. E. & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2005). Destination branding: Insights and
practices from destination management organizations. Journal of Travel
Research, 43(4), 328–338.
Bodega, D., Cioccarelli, G. & Denicolai, S. (2004). New inter-organizational
forms: Evolution of relationship structures in mountain tourism. Tourism
Review, 59(3), 13–19.
Management, 21(SI), 97–116.
Cockerell, N. (1994). Market segments: The international ski market in Europe.
EIU Travel and Tourism Analyst, 3(1), 34–55.
Dredge, D. (1999). Destination place planning and design. Annals of Tourism
Research, 26(4), 772–791.
Dredge, D. (2006). Policy networks and the local organization of tourism. Tourism
Management, 27(2), 269–280.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of
Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
Flagestad, A. & Hope, C. A. (2001). Strategic success in winter sports destinations:
A sustainable value creation perspective. Tourism Management, 22(5), 445–461.
Fredman, P. & Heberlein, T. A. (2003). Changes in skiing and snowmobiling in
Swedish mountains, Annals of Tourism Research, 30(2), 485–488.
Gaido, L. (1998). Les stations de neige de l’avenir. Revue de Tourisme, 2(3),
29–37.
Hudson, S. (2000). Snow business: A study of the international ski industry.
London: Cassell.
Hudson, S. & Miller, G. A. (2005). The responsible marketing of tourism: The case
of Canadian mountain holidays. Tourism Management, 26(2), 133–142.
Hunt, J. D. & Layne, D. (1991). Evolution of travel and tourism terminology and
definitions. Journal of Travel Research, 29(4), 7–11.
Leiper, N. (1995). Tourism management. Melbourne: RMIT Press.
Mintzberg, H. & Waters, J. A. (1985). Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Stra-
tegic Management Journal, 6(3), 257–272.
Molteni, M. & Sainaghi, R. (1997). Management di un distretto turistico. Econo-
mia and Management, 6(2007), 93–104.
Perry, A. (2000). Tourism and recreation. In M. Perry (Eds.), Assessment of poten-
tial effects and adaptations for climate change in Europe (pp. 217–226).
Norwich: Jackson Environment Institute, University of East Anglia.
Peters, M. & Pikkemaat, B. (2005). Crisis management in Alpine winter sports
resorts: The 1999 avalanche disaster in Tyrol. Travel and Tourism Marketing,
19(2/3), 9–20.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.
Ritchie, J. R. B. & Crouch, G. I. (2000). The competitive destination: A sustainable
perspective. Tourism Management, 21(1), 1–7.
Ritchie, J. R. B. & Ritchie, R. J. B. (1999). The branding of alpine ski resorts: A new
lift from an old concept. In M. Fuchs, M. Peters, B. Pikkemaar & E. Reiger (Eds.),
Tourismus in den Alpen (pp. 141–152). Innsbruck: Studia Universitätverlag.
Sainaghi, R. (2003). Destination management: A process based view. Bamberg:
Difo-Druck GmbH.
Sainaghi, R. (2004). La gestione strategica dei distretti turistici. Milan: Egea.
Sainaghi, R. (2006). From contents to processes: Versus a dynamic destination
management model (DDMM). Tourism Management, 27(6), 1053–1063.
Scott, D., McBoyle, G. & Mills, B. (2003). Climate change and the skiing industry
in Southern Ontario (Canada): Exploring the importance of snowmaking as a
technical adaptation. Climate Research, 23(2), 171–181.
Sheehan, L. R. & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2005). Destination stakeholders: Exploring
identity and salience. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3), 711–734.
Spring, J. (1998). Subtle but important shifts in customers. Ski Area Management,
37(5), 57–58.
Wall, G. (1992). Tourism alternatives in an era of global climate change. In V.
Smith & W. Eadington (Eds.), Tourism alternatives (pp. 194–236). Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Williams, P. W., Gill, A. M. & Chura, N. (2004). Branding mountain destinations:
The battle for “placefulness”. Tourism Review, 59(1), 6–15.
Yin, R. (1984). Case study research (1st ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Part II
Destination branding
5 A movie map conversion study
A case study of Pride & Prejudice
Stephen Pratt
Introduction
Tourism marketing is one of the most influential means of maintaining and
increasing the number of visitors and stays in a destination. Hence, the
evaluation of the success of a tourism marketing campaign is vital not only
for the destination, since it involves important economic benefits, but also
for the organisations funding these campaigns. Greater knowledge about
the effectiveness of different types of marketing could help government
organisations and businesses in the region to tailor their products to
achieve greater benefits from marketing expenditures. Expenditure on mar-
keting by Destination Marketing Organisations (DMOs) has been subject
to debate and the question of effectiveness has often been raised. Until
recently, DMOs have not attempted to answer the question with any
rigour of whether their marketing works. However, the more forward-
looking organisations are now starting to tackle this question by employ-
ing quantitative methods and analytical techniques.
This chapter outlines how a regional tourism agency evaluated a film-
inspired tourism marketing campaign. A marketing campaign was devised
to coincide with the release of the 2005 version of Pride & Prejudice, a
film based on the Jane Austen novel. The key component of the marketing
campaign was the production of a movie map showing potential visitors
the locations of scenes depicted in the film. Visitor research was under-
taken to evaluate the success of the marketing campaign, with particular
emphasis on the movie map, in converting potential visitors (those request-
ing a movie map) to travel to the destination. The main focus of the
research was to determine the “conversion rate” of people requesting a
movie map. The incremental spend to the region and subsequent return on
investment of the marketing campaign was quantified. The study provides
insight into the usefulness of the creation of a movie map in driving vis-
itors to locations used in the film.
60 S. Pratt
Literature review
Film-induced tourism can be referred to as an experience that is very much
personalised and distinctive to each individual based on their own under-
standing and use of media images (Macionis, 2005). Past research has
focussed on the behavioural characteristics of the film-induced tourist. This
approach is usually set within Urry’s (1990) structure of the tourist ‘gaze’,
in terms of a film creating a ‘gaze’ for a person to view. In this context,
tourists may be induced to holiday at the destination they have seen at the
cinema, DVD or television. Riley, Baker and van Doren (1998) state that
when tourists seek the destinations they have viewed on screen, they
become film-induced tourists.
Film and television help shape consumer perceptions of destinations. In
contrast to traditional advertising, destinations depicted in movies and
television series allow the potential tourist to develop more complete desti-
nation images through vicarious consumption. Films can display attributes
and unique characteristics of destinations within a film script. Media rep-
resentations of a destination have a strong influence in how destinations
are perceived (Frost, 2006; Mercille, 2005; Sargent, 1998; Winter, 2002).
Big screen film presentations can give a destination something most
tourism promotion organisations basically could not pay for nor be able to
produce (Bolan & Davidson, 2005).
Interest in film-induced tourism is increasing in popular culture and
tourism literature. This research spans a significant breadth of media –
movies, television (both on- and off-location), film-related theme parks,
studio tours and film festivals (see Beeton, 2005; Kim, Borges & Chon,
2006). Most studies are aware of both the positive and negative impacts
associated with film-induced tourism. A significant amount of research has
been undertaken highlighting the power of movies and television series in
driving increased visitation to destinations. Early examples of films driving
visitation are documented by Riley and van Doren (1992), citing Deliver-
ance, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Field of Dreams. Tooke and
Baker (1996) come to the same conclusion using four UK case studies,
namely the TV series, To the Manor Born, Heartbreak, Middlemarch and
By the Sword Divided.
Riley et al. (1998) compile visitation data for 12 different movie loca-
tions, all in the United States. Examining attendance figures for these 12
tourism film locations for ten years before the film release and five years
after, the aggregated impact of movies was estimated to result in a 54 per
cent increase in visitor numbers to these locations. Bolan, Crossan and
O’Connor (2006), via a survey of residents’ perceptions, detail significant
incremental revenue, tourist visits and economic developments as a result
of the 1970 film Ryan’s Daughter set in Dingle, Ireland and Avoca,
Ireland, the location of the popular BBC television series Ballykissangel.
From a tourism business operators’ perspective, Connell (2005) identifies
A case study of Pride & Prejudice 61
the nature and scope of the impact of television-induced tourism on Mull,
Scotland where the BBC children’s television series Balamory was filmed.
Hudson and Ritchie (2006) outline a model for exploiting film tourism
marketing opportunities in which they highlight four types of marketing
activities that destinations can engage in to promote film tourism, catego-
rised chronologically as marketing activities before, during and after the
release of the film. Marketing activities before the release of the film
include the destination’s effort to encourage producers and studios to film
at the destination. While during the film, marketing efforts follow the more
traditional route to generate media publicity around the film and its loca-
tion. Further, destinations can then sustain interest in the location where
they promote the film location after production and, last, marketers can
design peripheral marketing activities that leverage film tourism potential.
As highlighted by Hudson and Ritchie, DMOs can leverage the expo-
sure in film to drive visitation to the destination. VisitBritain’s Movie Map,
being perhaps the most successful long-running campaign (Urry, 1990) fea-
tures some 200 film and television locations around the UK that tourists
could visit. Recently, a new series of movie maps have been created in con-
nection with the film, King Arthur (2004) and newer additions have
included trails in connection with the hugely successful British film Bridget
Jones – The Edge of Reason (2001) and Closer (2004) (Bolan & Davidson,
2005). VisitScotland has also been very supportive of the film tourism
concept (predominantly since the 1995 film Braveheart) (Beeton, 2005),
whereas Wicklow County Tourism, Ireland has not been as encouraging
due to its financial limitations (O’Connor & Flanagan, 2000).
While a significant amount of research has been undertaken into general
tourism advertising effectiveness using conversion or advertising tracking
studies, little research has been published measuring the incremental
expenditure generated by a film-induced tourism marketing campaign. This
research goes some way to counter the assertion, as pointed out by Busby
and Klug (2001) and Riley et al. (1998), that there is a tendency to be
vague in estimating the impact of films on tourism. Heeding the call by
Riley et al. (1998) to document the economic impact of one movie on a
location or community, this piece of research evaluates a film-themed des-
tination marketing campaign and its return on investment using a conver-
sion study methodology.
Film induced tourism marketing

Jane Austen’s most famous novel, Pride and Prejudice, was first published
in 1813. The story describes relationships and marriage among the upper
classes in early nineteenth century England. The relationship between the
two main characters, Elizabeth Bennet and Mr Darcy, continues to capti-
vate modern readers. The novel has been turned into several big- and
small-screen adaptations. Recent television versions include the 1980
62 S. Pratt
television serial, Pride and Prejudice, starring Elizabeth Garvie and David
Rintoul, a BBC adaptation and the 1995 TV serial, starring Colin Firth
and Jennifer Ehle as Mr Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet, respectively. The
most recent film version was 2005’s Pride & Prejudice starring Matthew
Macfadyen and Keira Knightley. It debuted in the UK in September 2005
(Wright, 2005). The DVD was released in February 2006. The 2005
release was filmed on location in the UK in the summer of 2004. The film
extensively used several stately homes in the East Midlands region, notably
Lincolnshire and Derbyshire.
The sites that were used in the 2005 version of Pride & Prejudice (and
their relationship to the plot) are as follows: Chatsworth House, Derby-
shire (exteriors and some interiors of Pemberley, Mr Darcy’s family home);
Haddon Hall, Derbyshire (the dining room became Elizabeth’s bedroom);
Peak District National Park (film scenery); Burghley House, Lincolnshire
(exterior and interior of Rosings, Lady Catherine de Bourgh’s home);
Stamford, Lincolnshire (used as the village of Meryton, home of the
Bennets). Other UK locations, shown in the 2005 release, outside the East
Midlands, are depicted on the movie map. The movie map also shows film
locations from the 1995 TV series including Sudbury Hall, Derbyshire (one
of the interior locations of Pemberley) and Belton House, Lincolnshire
(used for the exterior and interior scenes at Rosings).
Such a widely read novel with numerous film adaptations provides an
excellent vehicle to motivate tourists to visit film locations. Given the pre-
dominance of Derbyshire and Lincolnshire film locations, the DMOs Lin-
colnshire Tourism and Visit Peak District and Derbyshire, developed a
marketing campaign to tap into the interest in this classic novel for both
the domestic and international visitor markets. East Midlands Tourism
(EMT), the regional development agency’s dedicated tourism body,
financed the initiative. The marketing campaign comprises several com-
ponents. To coincide with the release of the film, EMT launched a heavy
public relations campaign aimed at both international and domestic visitor
markets. Specifically for the domestic market, a private screening of the
film for UK media and travel trade was shown at Chatsworth House;
advertising was placed in national newspapers and targeted magazines.
An important component in the marketing mix is the creation of the
website http://www.visitprideandprejudice.com. This website provides
information on the film as well as the film locations and contains an online
booking system for short break package and/or tours in ‘Pride and Preju-
dice Country’. A range of short breaks ‘in the real life movie set’ include a
‘Rosings Package’, including entry to Burghley House and a walking tour
of Stamford, and a ‘Pemberley Package’, including entry to Chatsworth
House and Haddon House. The website includes links to the Jane Austen
Society and the Jane Austen Society of North America. A key feature of the
website is the ability to download a ‘Pride and Prejudice’ movie map and a
web form to request to be mailed a movie map. The movie map provides a
tangible marketing tool that potential visitors can use to plan their trip
itinerary and it displays locations used in the recent film as well as loca-
tions from the most recent Pride and Prejudice television series (1995).
Methodology
To evaluate a marketing campaign, several types of quantitative methods
may be implemented. Advertising tracking studies and conversion studies
are two methodologies used extensively by state and regional destination
marketing organisations (Silberman & Klock, 1986; Woodside, 1990).
Advertising tracking models measure changes in the levels of a destina-
tion’s awareness and its image in target markets (McWilliams & Cromp-
ton, 1997). The effectiveness of the advertising is not limited by visiting a
destination or not but includes a range of psychological and cognitive
dimensions that can impact awareness and intention to visit well into the
future.
Conversion studies have been used extensively in measuring destination
marketing effectiveness. Various US state tourism departments, such as
Vermont, Virginia and Montana, have conducted conversion studies for
years (for example see Kuentzel, 1993a, 1993b; TravelMontana, 1998;
VTC, 2001). These types of studies focus on the revenue and costs gener-
ated by different media or target markets. More recently, Tierney (2000)
and McLemore and Mitchell (2001) have undertaken tourism website con-
version studies for the states of California and Arkansas respectively. This
medium has been used more prominently in the marketing of tourist
destinations.
McWilliams and Crompton (1997) differentiate advertising tracking
studies from conversion studies by the latter’s request for information as a
necessary condition for conversion behaviour rather than optional
condition:
The advertising tracking approach assumes that potential visitors may

be ‘converted’ to purchase a tourism service solely on the basis of
awareness and image building impacts, as opposed to the conversion
approach which requires information search manifested by an overt
response action prior to conversion.
(p. 129)
Messmer and Johnson (1993) undertake research that compares the two
types of studies.
For any destination the key question remains: how do you know if your
marketing works? A conversion study can be implemented to help answer
this question. It is the most appropriate method to evaluate the effec
tiveness of the Pride & Prejudice campaign as the movie map is the
primary marketing tool and inquiry mechanism. The conversion study will
64 S. Pratt
calculate a net conversion rate that accounts for components of the
decision making process irrespective of other persuasive media appeals.
This conversion ratio can be used to estimate effectiveness and efficiency
ratios, economic impact and return on investment (Burke and Lindblom,
1989). The limitations of using a conversion study methodology have been
highlighted by several authors (Ellerbrock, 1981; Burke & Gitelson, 1990;
Ballman, Burke, Blank & Korte, 1984; Messmer & Johnson, 1993; Perdue
& Botkin, 1988; Silberman & Klock, 1986; Woodside & Reid, 1974;
Woodside & Ronkainen, 1984).
In order to track the effectiveness of the marketing and for future mar-
keting purposes, the DMOs captured details of potential visitors who were
exposed to and interested in visiting ‘Pride and Prejudice Country’. Visitors
to the website, http://www.visitprideandprejudice.com, needed to complete
their contact details to request more information or download the associ-
ated movie map. A total of 9,191 unique UK contacts were captured via
the ‘Pride and Prejudice’ website as well as in Tourist Information Centres
during the campaign period.
A random sample of 1,500 respondents was selected to be surveyed. A
mail pack containing the one-page survey, a cover letter from the CEO of
Lincolnshire Tourism explaining the purpose of the survey, a competition
entry form for the incentive and a pre-paid return envelope was sent by
first class post to respondents. An incentive of a weekend break for two in
‘Pride and Prejudice Country’ was offered by Lincolnshire Tourism to
encourage return of the questionnaires. After approximately four weeks,
the data collection ended with 391 completed questionnaires returned.
This resulted in a response rate of 26.1 per cent. A one-page questionnaire
was produced covering the following areas:
• source of information about the website/movie map;

• the potential visitors’ situation at the time they sought information;
• number of trips and length of stay in ‘Pride and Prejudice Country’
since the release of the film (approximately ten months);
• Pride & Prejudice film locations visited (Pride * Prejudice film loca-
tions/associated film attractions/BBC TV series locations/gardens);
• intention to revisit the destination again during the next six months;
influence of the different marketing components (movie map, website,
press/TV/radio features and the film) in converting visitation (meas-
ured on a 5-point Likert scale);
• usefulness of the movie map and website in planning a trip (measured
on a 5-point Likert scale); party size and composition.
Allowing potential visitors the time to plan and visit the destination before
the evaluation took place and the impact of memory on expenditure recall
needed to be considered (Mak, Moncur & Yonamine, 1977; Zhou, 2000).
Following Perdue and Gustke (1992), the questionnaire measured visita-
tion by asking how many trips the respondent made rather than asking the
dichotomous question of whether the respondent visited the destination or
not. A significant number of visitors made more than one trip to the desti-
nation. This impacts the calculation of total visitor expenditures.
The results of the conversion study are now outlined, detailing the conver-
sion rate, the incremental expenditure to the region directly attributable to
the marketing campaign and the return on investment for the marketing
campaign and differences in visitors’ trip characteristics depending on the
degree of influence the movie map had on their decision to visit. The gross
conversion rate indicates the proportion of enquirers who took a trip to
the destination after requesting the movie map. A total of 187 respondents
stated that they visited the destination, a gross conversion rate of 47.8 per
cent.
However, the gross conversion rate includes visitors who had already
planned to visit the destination at the time of requesting the movie map.
Davidson (1994) explains that ‘Including those who already decided their
visits and the dollars they spent greatly distorts (overstates) the actual sales
impact and, hence, the effectiveness of the advertising-fulfilment program.’
Using a funnel analogy, Siegel and Ziff-Levine (1990) note that after con-
sumers have received the information, a subset will be interested in visiting
the destination in the immediate future (motivation) and a subset will visit
the destination during a defined time period (conversion).
The net conversion rate represents the proportion of those who
requested the movie map and who travelled to the destination as a direct
result of the marketing information they received. It is important that the
net conversion rate only includes visitors who have not committed to a trip
before requesting the movie map but were influenced by the marketing
tools on the decision to visit. This is a more appropriate measure of cam-
paign effectiveness. Excluding the respondents who specified that they had
already booked or committed to a trip to the destination, visitors to the
destination were asked the strength of influence each marketing compon-
ent had in turning a possible visit into a certainty.
For the movie map, 56 respondents answered that they were definitely
influenced by the movie map to turn a possible visit into a certainty, a
further 48 were probably influenced and 31 were possibly influenced. The
strengths of influence of the marketing campaign are ascribed different
weightings. Those visitors who were definitely influenced by the movie
map in turning a possible visit into a certainty are ascribed a weight of 100
per cent, those who were probably influenced are ascribed a weight of 50
per cent and those who were possibly influenced by the movie map are
assigned a weight of 20 per cent. These weights were defined by EMT. The
conversion rate is the weighted sum of the proportion of influenced visitors
66 S. Pratt
that report making a trip to the destination, having not booked or commit-
ted to a trip previously. The calculation is given by:
   (V × W )

   i i
CR =  __________
i
N   
 
where CR is the conversion rate, Vi is frequency count of those visitors to

the destination who had not booked or committed to a trip at the time
they requested a movie map yet were influenced by the marketing material,
Wi is the weight attached to the influence the movie map had on the
respondent’s decision to visit the destination and N is the sample size. The
subscript ‘i’ represents the different degrees of influence – ‘definitely’,
‘probably’ and ‘possibly’. Applying the weights, the effective count of vis-
itors that were influenced by the marketing campaign, having not booked
or committed to a trip previously is 86.2. This results in a net conversion
rate of 22.0 per cent. This is shown diagrammatically in Figure 5.1.
Here, the expenditure impacts that visitors and/or potential visitors have
in the destination are investigated. Incremental spend as a direct result of
the marketing campaign is derived from two segments. The first segment is
those respondents who are converted to the destination as a direct result of
the campaign (visitors), that is, tourists who visited the destination but had
not booked or committed to a trip at the time of requesting the movie
map. The second segment is those visitors to the destination that had
already booked or committed to a trip but who extended their stay in the
destination as a direct result of the campaign (extenders). Only the expend-
Total sample
N � 391
Not booked Booked

N � 364 N � 27
(93.1%) (6.9%)
Visited Did not visit Visited Not yet visited

N � 163 N � 201 N � 24 N�3
(47.1%) (51.4%) (6.1%) (0.8%)
Influence V� W � Effective V
Definitely 56 100% 56.0
Probably 48 50% 24.0
Possibly 31 20% 6.2
Total 86.2
Figure 5.1 Effective influence of the marketing campaign.

iture for the extended part of this segment’s trip will be included in the
expenditure analysis.
Incremental spend is calculated in the following way:
 

   (Pi × Wi) × S × E × L × C
i
where S is the average party size for the segment, E is the average per
person per night expenditure for the segment, L is the average length of
stay for the segment and C is the total number of unique contacts that
responded to the campaign, 9,191. Pi is the percentage of respondents of
the total sample who are influenced by the movie map and Wi is the weight
attached to the influence the movie map had on the respondent’s decision
to visit the destination. The subscript ‘i’ represents the different degrees of
influence – ‘definitely’, ‘probably’ and ‘possibly’. As in the conversion rate
calculation, the weightings for ‘definitely’, ‘probably’ and ‘possibly’ are
100 per cent, 50 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively.
For the visitor segment, incremental expenditure is calculated by first
excluding the 27 respondents who had already booked or committed to a
trip to the destination. A total of 201 respondents did not visit the destina-
tion while 163 visited the destination. For those visitors to the destination
that had not booked nor already committed to making a trip, the average
party size was 2.7 persons, the average length of stay was 3.8 nights and
the average per person per day expenditure was C71.85 (£49.02). Of the
total sample, 14.3 per cent are definitely influenced, 12.3 per cent are prob-
ably influenced and 7.9 per cent are possibly influenced by the movie map
and turned the possibility of a trip into a certainty. The total amount of
expenditure undertaken by all visitors is estimated to be C1,493,670. The
calculations are shown in Table 5.1.
Visitors who had already booked or committed to a trip to the destina-
tion were asked if the movie map influenced them to extend their stay and
by how many days. On average the visitors responded that they had spent
3.2 extra days. These extenders travelled in a party size of 2.5 and spent
C82.25 on each extra day. A total of C97,448 was spent as a result of the
influence of the movie map to extend visitors’ stays.
Table 5.1 Visitors’ expenditure impact during their visits to the destination
Movie map (%) Weights Average Spend per Number Total Total
influence Pi Wi (%) party size person per of nights contacts (C)
S night L C
E
Definitely 14.3 100 970,366

Probably 12.3 50 2.7 C71.85 3.8 9,191 415,871
Possibly 7.9 20 107,433
Sum = 1,493,670
68 S. Pratt
Because it cannot be assumed that respondents to the questionnaire act
in the same way as non-respondents (i.e. non-respondents are deemed less
likely to have visited and to have been influenced) (Ellerbrock, 1981) an
adjustment needs to be made to the incremental spend figures to allow for
non-response bias. In line with Hunt and Dalton (1983) and Woodside
and Ronkainen (1984), a reduction of 20 per cent of the incremental spend
is allowed for non-response bias. All the total expenditure figures are
reduced by 20 per cent to minimise non-response bias problems. Table 5.2
summarises the expenditure impact of the visitors by segment.
The total cost of the campaign was C157,516 (£107,469 including pro-
duction, advertising and fulfilment).
Return expenditure generated

Return on investment = __________________________
         
Campaign cost
The return on investment calculation includes the total expenditure gen-

erated for those who reported to have visited the destination already. That
is, the sum of the visitors’ expenditure (A in Table 5.2) and the total
expenditure of the extenders (B in Table 5.2). Dividing by the campaign
cost, the minimum return on investment is 8.1:1. This means for every
euro spent, around C8 of expenditure was generated.
Another question that arises in conversion research is whether visitors
who use the movie map spend more money and do different and/or more
activities than visitors who do not use such a map. Previous research
(Woodside, MacDonald & Trappey, 1997; Woodside & Dubelaar, 2002)
suggests that heavy users of destination information (e.g. movie maps and
visitor information guides), often stay longer, do more activities in the des-
tination area, spend more money, are more satisfied with their visits and
are more willing to visit the destination in the future than light users of
destination information.
This research confirms some of the previous findings: there is a positive
relationship between the degree of influence of the movie map and the likeli-
hood to visit locations associated with the film. The more visitors were influ-
enced by the movie map, the more likely they were to visit each set of
Table 5.2 Summary of incremental expenditure due to the influence of the movie

map
Incremental expenditure as a direct result of movie map

Visitor type Estimated expenditure Adjustment for non-response bias
(C) (C)
Converted Visitors 1,493,670 1,194,936 (A)

Extenders 97,448 77,958 (B)
Total 1,591,118 1,272,894
locations and the more likely they were to visit more locations overall. Addi-
tionally visitors that were influenced to a greater extent by the movie map
were more likely to visit the destination in the future. However, there were
no statistically significant relationships in visitors’ length of stay and expend-
iture and the degree to which visitors were influenced by the movie map.
Conversion studies are part of accountability research in tourism mar-
keting. These types of studies determine whether the advertisement reaches
its market and provide an assessment of the quality and quantity of the
travel information pack. Nevertheless, as with any methodology, there are
limitations with this methodology as well as this particular piece of
research. An alternative way to circumvent some these limitations would
be to conduct proper evaluation research that compares the impact of an
intervention, a movie map in this case, by using a control and treatment
group. Woodside et al. (1997) outline a method of conducting this quasi-
experiment through exit surveys. Through creating an experiment that
offers and does not offer the opportunity to download a movie map, a
proper evaluation can take place for whether or not the movie map cam-
paign influenced visitors’ intention to visit the destination, actual visits and
travel behaviour. Significantly more resources may be needed to undertake
this. For a multi-location destination such as the Pride & Prejudice film
locations, this may be problematic.
A response rate of 26.1 per cent brings into question the issue of non-
response bias. To increase the response rate, researchers typically have fol-
lowed Dillman’s Total Design Method (Dillman, 1978), which advocates
the sending of two follow-up questionnaires to non-respondents, among
other techniques to increase response rates. This was not conducted in this
study and presents a limitation of this research. Woodside and Ronkainen
(1984) conclude that conversion rates and travel behaviour patterns did
significantly differ between first, second and third wave respondents.
Resources could have been devoted to following up extensively non-
respondents using substantial incentives or alternative data collection
methods (Crompton & Tian-Cole, 2001).
This research identified the destination in the cover letter and question-
naire. This is the typical practice in tourism conversion studies. Neverthe-
less, several studies have noted that by identifying the sponsor of the
research, conversion rates are higher and response rates are lower than
when the sponsor is not identified (Woodside, 1981; Woodside & Dube-
laar, 2003). Future research may want to explore this area more.

The strength of the ‘Pride and Prejudice’ product has been confirmed
among domestic tourists in the UK. The production of a movie map, as
one of the key elements in the marketing mix, provided a useful tool to
enable potential visitors to plan their trip to ‘Pride and Prejudice Country’.
70 S. Pratt
The movie map is the key driver in converting potential visitors to the des-
tination. This research quantifies the incremental visitor expenditure spent
in the region that was generated through the influence of the movie map
marketing campaign. The Pride & Prejudice movie map marketing cam-
paign is estimated to generate over C1 million to the host destination. This
represents a return on investment of 8:1. The regional tourism body, EMT,
who funded the marketing, set a target return on investment of 10:1.
Hence the marketing campaign fell a little short of expectations. Neverthe-
less, by measuring the incremental expenditure attributable to the cam-
paign, EMT is able to quantity the direct economic impact of the
incremental visitors to the destination and take steps to improve the mar-
keting of future campaigns throughout the region.
However, the additional visitor spending does not represent the total
economic impact that the film brought to the region. The direct economic
impact will be part of the total expenditure. The direct or initial effects
lead to a series of successive or indirect impacts on the producing sectors.
To estimate the total economic impact (direct and indirect impacts) to the
region, a more comprehensive methodology such as a regional input–out-
put (IO) analysis or a regional computable general equilibrium (CGE)
model would need to be implemented.
The economic impacts of film-induced tourism have been under-
researched. This research goes some way to address this issue. The case
study in this research, a movie map focused marketing campaign, has been
shown to have positive qualitative as a well as a quantitative impact on
tourists. Visitors who stated they were more influenced by the movie map
were more likely to visit more places and more likely to plan to return to
the destination. This qualitative impact can be a large but often hidden
influence of tourism marketing campaigns.
Whilst this research has contributed to the existing knowledge of film
tourism, it would be prudent to build on it through further research.
Research examining whether the main findings identified here are more
widely representative, in terms of both different genre of films and differ-
ent type of destinations, would be useful. A multi-destination research
study could be undertaken in examining the film-induced destination. This
would provide rich comparative data on the nature and characteristics of
the film-induced phenomenon in other such destinations. This research
would add significantly to the concept of film-induced tourism worldwide
and would highlight the similarities and discrepancies between the influ-
ences of the film-induced tourism marketing on host destinations.
References
Ballman, G., Burke, J., Blank, U. & Korte, D. (1984). Towards higher quality con-
version studies: Refining the numbers game. Journal of Travel Research, 22(4),
28–33.
Beeton, S. (2005). Film-induced tourism. Clevedon: Channel View.
Bolan, P., Crossan, M. & O’Connor, N. (2006). Film and television induced
tourism in Ireland: A comparative impact study of Ryan’s Daughter and Bal-
lykissangel. Fifth DeHaan Tourism Management Conference. TTRI, University
of Nottingham Business School.
Bolan, P. & Davidson, K. (2005). Film induced tourism in Ireland: Exploring the
potential. University of Ulster Conference, Portrush, ‘Tourism and hospitality
research in Ireland: Exploring the issues’, 14–15 June, pp. 1–19.
Burke, J. & Gitelson, R. (1990). Conversion studies: Assumptions, accuracy and
abuse. Journal of Travel Research, 28(3), 46–51.
Burke, J. & Lindblom, L. A. (1989). Strategies for evaluating direct response
tourism marketing. Journal of Travel Research, 28(2), 33–37.
Busby, G. & Klug, J. (2001). Movie-induced tourism: The challenge of measure-
ment and other issues. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 7(4), 316–332.
Connell, J. (2005). Toddlers, tourism and Tobermory: Destination marketing issues
and television-induced tourism. Tourism Management, 26(5), 763–776.
Crompton, J. L. & Tian-Cole, S. (2001). An analysis of 13 tourism surveys: Are
three waves of data collection necessary? Journal of Travel Research, 39(4),
356–368.
Davidson, T. L., ed. (1994). Assessing the effectiveness of persuasive communica-
tions in tourism. In J. R. B. Ritchie and C. R. Goeldner (Eds.), Travel, tourism,
and hospitality research (2nd ed., pp. 537–544). New York: Wiley.
Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New
York: Wiley.
Ellerbrock, M. (1981). Improving coupon conversion studies: A comment. Journal
of Travel Research, 19(4), 37–38.
Frost, W. (2006). Braveheart-ed Ned Kelly: Historic films, heritage tourism and
destination image. Tourism Management, 27(2), 247–254.
Hudson, S. & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2006). Promoting destinations via film tourism: An
empirical identification of supporting marketing initiatives. Journal of Travel
Research, 44(4), 387–396.
Hunt, J. D. & Dalton, M. J. (1983). Comparing mail and telephone for conducting
coupon conversion studies. Journal of Travel Research, 21(3), 16.
Kim, H., Borges, M. C. & Chon, J. (2006). Impacts of environmental values on
tourism motivation: The case of FICA, Brazil. Tourism Management, 27(5),
957–967.
Kuentzel, W. F. (1993a). 1992 summer/fall conversion study: Comparing the effec-
tiveness of four media promotions. Vermont Department of Travel and Tourism,
Burlington, Vermont. Retrieved 5 May 2007, from: http://tourismresearch@uvm.
edu, p. 58.
Kuentzel, W. F. (1993b). 1994 winter conversion study: Media effectiveness, travel
planning and 1–800-VERMONT. Vermont Department of Travel and Tourism.
Burlington, Vermont. Retrieved from http://tourismresearch@uvm.edu, p. 55.
McLemore, C. & Mitchell, N. (2001). An internet conversion study of www.
arkansas.com: A state tourism website. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 7(3),
268–274.
McWilliams, E. G. & Crompton, J. L. (1997). An expanded framework for meas-
uring the effectiveness of destination advertising. Tourism Management, 18(3),
127–137.
72 S. Pratt
Macionis, N. (2005). Lights! Camera! Tourist! In E. Davies & A. Moran (Eds.),
Film and media in context. Working Papers in Communication No. 4/5. Griffith
University, School of Arts, Media and Culture, Queensland, Australia.
Mak, J., Moncur, J. & Yonamine, D. (1977). How or how not to measure visit
expenditures. Journal of Travel Research, 16(3), 1–4.
Mercille, J. (2005). Media effects on image: The case of Tibet. Annals of Tourism
Research, 32(4), 1039–1055.
Messmer, D. J. & Johnson, R. R. (1993). Inquiry conversion and travel advertising
effectiveness. Journal of Travel Research, 31(4), 14–21.
O’Connor, N. & Flanagan, S. (2000). The sociocultural impacts of Ballykissangel
on the village of Avoca, County Wicklow. Dublin Institute of Technology/Uni-
versity College Dublin, ‘Sustainability, tourism and the environment conference’,
7–8 September.
Perdue, R. R. & Botkin, M. R. (1988). Visitor survey versus conversion study.
Annals of Tourism Research, 15(1), 76–87.
Perdue, R. R. & Gustke, L. D. (1992). The influence of multiple trips on inquiry
conversion research results. Journal of Travel Research, 30(4), 27–30.
Riley, R., Baker, D. & van Doren, C. S. (1998). Movie-induced tourism. Annals of
Riley, R. & van Doren, C. S. (1992). Movies as tourism promotion: A ‘pull factor’
in a ‘push’ location. Tourism Management, 13(3), 267–274.
Sargent, A. (1998). The Darcy effect: Regional tourism and costume drama. Inter-
national Journal of Heritage Studies, 4(3/4), 177–186.
Siegel, W. & Ziff-Levine, W. (1990). Evaluating tourism advertising campaigns:
Conversion vs advertising tracking studies. Journal of Travel Research, 28(3),
51–55.
Silberman, J. & Klock, M. (1986). Alternative to conversion studies for measuring
the impact of travel ads. Journal of Travel Research, 24(4), 12–16.
Tierney, P. (2000). Internet-based evaluation of tourism web site effectiveness:
Methodological issues and survey results. Journal of Travel Research, 39(2),
212–219.
Tooke, N. & Baker, M. (1996). Seeing is believing: The effects of film on visitor
numbers to screened locations. Tourism Management, 17(2), 87–94.
TravelMontana (1998). Magazine travel conversion study. Retrieved 6 May 2007,
from: http://travelmontana.state.mt.us/research/Magazineconversionstudy98.pdf,
pp. 1–54.
Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gaze. London: Sage Publications.
VTC (2001). 2001 German conversion study results. Virginia tourism corporation.
Retrieved 5 May 2007, from: http://www.vatc.org/research/2001GermanWriteup.
htm, pp. 1–3.
Winter, T. (2002). Angkor meets Tomb Raider: Setting the scene. International
Journal of Heritage Studies, 8(4), 323–336.
Woodside, A. G. (1981). Measuring the conversion of advertising coupon inquirers
into visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 19(4), 38–39.
Woodside, A. G. (1990). Measuring advertising effectiveness in destination market-
ing strategies. Journal of Travel Research, 29(2), 3–8.
Woodside, A. G. & Dubelaar, C. (2002). A general theory of tourism consumption
systems: A conceptual framework and an empirical exploration. Journal of
Travel Research, 41(2), 120–132.
Woodside, A. G. & Dubelaar, C. (2003). Increasing quality in measuring advert-
ising effectiveness: A meta-analysis of question framing in conversion studies.
Journal of Advertising Research, 43(1), 78–85.
Woodside, A. G., MacDonald, R. & Trappey III, R. J. (1997). Measuring linkage-
advertising effects on customer behavior and net revenue. Canadian Journal of
Administrative Sciences, 14(2), 214–228.
Woodside, A. G. & Reid, D. M. (1974). Tourism profiles versus audience profiles:
Are upscale magazines really upscale? Journal of Travel Research, 12(4), 17–23.
Woodside, A. G. & Ronkainen, I. A. (1984). How serious is nonresponse bias in
advertising conversion research. Journal of Travel Research, 22(4), 36.
Wright, J. (2005). Pride and Prejudice. United Kingdom: Universal Studios.
Zhou, Z. (2000). The impact of memory on expenditures recall in tourism conver-
sion studies. Journal of Travel Research, 38(3), 304–307.
6 Music-tourism networks
A study of three festivals in
Queensland
Breda McCarthy, Gianna Moscardo,
Laurie Murphy and Philip Pearce
Introduction
Participation in networks is now seen as critical to the success of special-
interest tourism and destinations (Baerenholdt & Haldrup, 2006; Gibson,
Lynch & Morrison, 2005; Hall, Cambourne, Macionis & Johnson, 1997;
Michael, 2007; Morrison, Lynch & Johns, 2004, Pavlovich, 2003; Shih,
2006; Stokes, 2005; Tinsley & Lynch, 2001). There are calls for more
research into networks given their potential to influence tourism planning
and investment decisions (Shih, 2006). To date, there has been little
research into music tourism networks.
The aim of this chapter is to present three case studies on music festivals
and demonstrate the incentives and disincentives for network participa-
tion. A key finding is that weak ties are associated with novel festival pro-
grammes. This chapter highlights the perspective that the future of music
festivals is enhanced by a practical engagement with the locality. Relation-
ships within the local business, tourism, educational and social spheres
create a greater interest in, and audience for the festivals, which in turn,
contribute to the vitality and viability of festivals and events. The link with
the locality is important because it is a source of differentiation and gives a
festival uniqueness.
Literature review
Festivals and events have experienced considerable growth in recent years.
They are used to attract crowds, generate publicity, enhance education,
preserve folk music and contribute to economic development (Getz, 1991;
Hall, 1992). It is implicit in the literature that festival managers engage in
multiple networks for different reasons. Knowledge of network typology is
useful in understanding network outcomes (Bagdadli, 2003). Production
networks channel mainly tangible goods. In a festival context, networks
consist of firms supplying goods and technical services as well as volun-
teers and sponsors (Baerenholdt & Haldrup, 2006). Experience networks
(Moscardo, McCarthy, Murphy & Pearce, 2008) are more humanistic in
Music-tourism networks 75
nature and their purpose is to connect people with other people. Motiva-
tions for entry into the network are socialisation, renewal of friendships
and enrichment of artistic practices.
Growing attention is being paid to the potential of festivals and events
to strengthen social networks (Matheson, 2005; Van Zyl & Botha, 2004).
In a recent literature review (Moscardo et al., 2008), two key themes
appear to be emerging: the importance of analysing stakeholder perspec-
tives and interactions (Getz, Andersson & Larson, 2007; Larson, 2002)
and the building of social capital (Arcodia & Whitford, 2007; Gursoy,
Kim & Uysal, 2004).
Despite the well-established literature on festivals and events, there is
limited application of social network concepts to festival networks. Key
network constructs are the strength or weakness of ties (Burt, 1992;
Granovetter, 1973; Uzzi, 1996). In Granovetter’s (1973) seminal work on
weak ties, he argues that such ties assist career development through casual
information exchange that is often novel and diverse. Examples of weak
ties are simple links with acquaintances or service personnel. Strong ties,
such as contacts with family and friends, are important as these actors are
strongly motivated to help one another (Granovetter, 1973). In a business
context, strength has been equated with intimacy, trust, long duration and
high frequency of interaction, openness and willingness to share informa-
tion and coordinate activities (Gilsing & Nooteboom, 2005).
In the literature on project management (Grabher 2004; Grabher &
Ibert, 2006), personal ties are seen to promote learning and problem
solving and facilitate access to labour markets. This type of network is
generally homogeneous, cohesive and local. Strong ties are often used as a
shorthand for social capital (Baerenholdt & Haldrup, 2006; Putnam,
1994). Researchers argue that optimal networks consist of strong and
weak ties since weak ties yield novel information and strong ties help
transmit tacit knowledge (Pavlovich, 2003; Uzzi, 1996). The general con-
clusion is that one can influence network outcomes depending on the types
of ties cultivated.
Festivals trade on their uniqueness and each year the programme needs
to be refreshed. According to Janiskee (1996), diversity in the festival pro-
gramme is important in offering greater entertainment value and more
choices to visitors. Although innovation is valued in the field of festival
management, research on the relationship between innovation and weak
ties is sparse. Baerenholdt and Haldrup (2006) propose that most of the
creative work in the tourism field is performed through weak ties and non-
local or spatially dispersed networks. This line of enquiry is important
since the arts are being encouraged to extend their reach in terms of audi-
ence types, prove their public value and deliver measurable outcomes,
achieved, perhaps, by entry into new types of networks. However, some
commentators question this policy shift. There are arguments that new
norms of instrumentalism – the engagement with the practical potential of
76 B. McCarthy et al.
the arts to contribute to society – could undermine artistic excellence
(Glow, Minahan & Gahan, 2005; O’Kelly, 2007). More specific investiga-
tion is needed to determine the types of networks that are developing
between arts and tourism, and if so, when, why and how.
A key debate in the literature concerns the overall structure of the
network (Pavlovich, 2003). Structure refers to the ‘architecture’ of the
network such as the number of partners, its hierarchy or stability (Rutten,
2004). The literature on cultural industries suggests that dense networks
are critical to the production of a cultural good, such as a film (Kong,
2005; Scott, 2000). Density is a sign of vitality and helps counter the inher-
ent risk in cultural production. Success in this context relies on dense net-
works of interdependent, small and medium sized firms, a wide variety of
skills, trust, cooperation and information flow between producers.
However, a problem with density is that it creates pressures to conform
and compromise (Di Maggio & Powell, 1983). In the literature on projects,
it is observed that the multidimensionality of networks gives rise to diverse
loyalties, conflicts of culture and professional identities (Baerenholdt &
Haldrup, 2006; Grabher, 2004; Grabher & Ibert, 2006). Therefore, two
opposing forces – conformity to norms and conflict – are present in
networks.
Figure 6.1 proposes a conceptual framework based on the literature
review. Studies suggest that networks characterised by sparse and weak
ties help some participants identify entrepreneurial opportunities (Burt
1992; Granovetter, 1973). In the high-tech sector, networks characterised
by dense and strong ties (Gilsing and Nooteboom, 2005) help engender
knowledge-based capabilities. This framework captures the network per-
spectives of interest in this study, specifically, (1) the analysis of relation-
ships, the strength or weakness of ties, (2) the analysis of the structure the
network, density and sparseness and (3) the analysis of network outcomes,
Strong ties (trust-based relationships)
Knowledge-based capabilities
Sparse (few ties) Dense (many ties)

Circulation of institutional norms
Time Resource acquisition
Entrepreneurial
opportunities
Weak ties (weak-trust relationships)
Figure 6.1 Conceptual framework: density, strong and weak tie connections.
such as the spread of norms, creation of social capital, innovation or entre-
preneurial opportunities.
Methodology
The aim of this chapter is to explore the significance of density and strong/
weak ties for event management. Key research questions are as follows.
What types of networks are used by festival managers? What are the out-
comes of network participation? What are the incentives and disincentives
for entry into networks? What impact do weak ties have on festival pro-
gramme uniqueness? The debates in the literature show that these research
issues are worthy of exploration. If there is an understanding of how net-
works operate and how actors interact, then one can assess which net-
works are most productive and seek to optimise network outcomes.
An inductive case-based approach was taken drawing on the principles
of grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Grounded theory is the
antithesis of the positivist approach, it is ethnographical in nature, subject-
ive and subscribes to the view that truth is not provided as a single reality
but is based on multiple realities. Although many network-based studies
use quantitative techniques, there has been a growth in studies that
examine small networks qualitatively (Gilsing & Nooteboom, 2005; Pav-
lovich, 2003). A comparative case-based approach was used since it is well
suited to describing how networks operate in real-world settings, and this
approach can be justified given the limited understanding of what types of
network ties are important, when, why and how these social relationships
are beneficial (or harmful) to event organisers.
Three comparative cases were selected and classified using the taxon-
omy proposed by Paleo and Wijnberg (2006). The events differed in
important ways. The Undara Experience is a for-profit event in a single
venue with a single track programme. It does not offer a competitive com-
ponent and has only a regional profile. The Ten Days in the Towers event
is an amateur competition that promotes Australian country music; it has
a national profile and uses a range of venues with multiple events on the
programme. Finally, the Australian Festival of Chamber Music (AFCM),
like the Undara Experience, is based on a European cultural tradition. It
has a complex programme, uses varied venues and has an international
profile. These variations in characteristics offer some potential to identify
different types of networks and relationships. Table 6.1 profiles each
event.
Data for this chapter were drawn from interviews undertaken between
December 2006 and February 2007. At each case study site, a key inform-
ant, the festival manager, was identified and was the subject of a one-hour,
face-to-face semi-structured interview. Snowballing led to follow-up inter-
views being undertaken with a representative of a City Council, Tourism
Queensland, Queensland Events and Arts Queensland. These stakeholders
Table 6.1 Profile of festivals
Case Undara Experience Ten Days in the Australian Festival

Towers of Chamber Music
Music genre Opera Australian Chamber music
country music
Management group Private sector/ Community-led Board of
entrepreneur committee Management
Estimated attendance 300 7,000 11,000
Audience base Domestic Domestic Domestic and
international
Primary purpose for Profit driven Economic Cultural benefit
holding the festival development and
cultural benefit
Estimated economic Limited economic Up to C2 million Up to C4 million
impact on region flows to region (worth
up to C90,000)
helped the authors explore the influence of the state on the networks as
well as assessing the validity of claims made by the primary interviewees.
A total of ten interviews were conducted. A variety of secondary sources
(i.e. websites, festival brochures and leaflets, newspaper articles, visitor
surveys, tourism reports) were used to provide context and give the authors
and researchers an insight into the key relationships formed.
The interviewees were encouraged to talk freely about the event, cover-
ing its history, any tensions or trade-offs made over the course of its devel-
opment, incentives and disincentives for entry into networks and positive
and negative outcomes associated with different types of relationships. In
order to measure the construct of strong ties and capture network out-
comes, the researchers were guided by Brian Uzzi’s (1997) study on the
significance of social ties (embeddedness) in inter-firm networks. Interviews
were taped and transcribed shortly afterwards. As regards data analysis,
the authors sought to identify common themes and patterns in the data
(Eisenhardt, 1989; Miles & Huberman, 1984) and used a grid matrix.
Here the implications of dense networks, strong and weak ties for music
tourism are outlined. Table 6.2 identifies the key themes revealed through
the fieldwork. Over time, the festivals became involved in a diversity of
networks and the networks comprised numerous actors such as local music
clubs, schools, visitor information centres, public sector agencies, the
media, local businesses and competing events. All three cases show that
event managers had to develop dense networks in order to acquire
Table 6.2 Analysis of the three festivals against network constructs
Key network constructs Undara Ten Days AFCM

Experience in the
Towers
Theme 1: Implications of a dense/expanding network

Resource acquisition Yes Some Yes
Spread of institutional norms Yes Yes Yes
Value clashes No Yes Some
Co-branding/packaging of festival for consumption Yes Yes Yes
Theme 2: Implications of strong ties within artistic
networks
Nurturing of talent Some Yes Yes
Sustaining local musical traditions Some Yes Some
Word-of-mouth advertising Yes Yes Yes
Theme 3: Implications of weak ties
Innovative and diverse festival programme Some Some Yes
Notes
No = no clear evidence.
Some = some evidence, largely indirect.
Yes = some clear evidence.
resources. Increased density was associated with the spread of institutional

norms, guidelines or rules together with value clashes. Over time, the festi-
vals began to work with other events and other art organisations in order
to attract a larger audience and secure grant aid. The cultivation of weak
ties with actors in a non-musical context facilitated the development of an
innovative and diverse festival programme. Strong ties helped nurture
talent, sustain musical traditions and build a reputation.
Resource acquisition
Dense networks summon up the resources needed to stage events such as
equipment, image, finance, artistic talent, venues. The festivals drew on
local resources where available, although the development of non-local
contacts with international artists helped legitimise and build an image for
the events, in particular Opera in the Outback and the AFCM. All three
events were engaged in networks that extended well beyond the state’s
geographical boundaries. At the same time, attempts were made to merge
local with non-local acts in order to appeal to a local audience. The mem-
bership of the networks was very heterogeneous, and included volunteers,
local music clubs, educational institutes, the local Visitor Information
Centre, the media and journalists, restaurants, hotels, coach tour oper-
ators, a mining company, a regional airline, a marine science institute,
local food producers and competing events.
Spread of institutional norms
Strong norms were diffused within festival networks such as the view that
events should demonstrate direct economic impacts and increase access to
the arts. The analysis showed that state bodies can be a positive force for
change. According to a spokesperson from Arts Queensland:
From Arts Queensland’s perspective, we are very interested in match-

ing supply with demand. We want to support good quality supply,
with high quality acts, but we want there to be a demand for that so
we are really interested in matching creative aspirations with market
opportunities. So we want organizations to be imaginative in program-
ming and to be enterprising in their demand-inducing activities so they
can be appealing and accessible to audiences; also, to be innovative
and challenging; overall, to make sure that the organization is finan-
cially sound.
There were substantial differences in revenue reported between the three

events and in the case of Opera in the Outback, management was seeking
to introduce elements that would enhance economic benefits including the
addition of a local Farmer’s Market and the increased use of accommoda-
tion in surrounding areas. Current thinking on democratising the arts influ-
enced the growth of networks. The AFCM was, and still is, positioned as a
highbrow festival, yet over the years its strategy has changed, and it has
invested time and energy into converting audiences to chamber music and
making it more accessible to a broader population.
Value clashes
The analysis shows that the dissemination of institutional norms into the
network had ramifications for some network participants. A good example
of the gulf between music and tourism is the Ten Days in the Towers case.
Funding bodies were keen to capitalise on the potential for tourism growth
and encouraged festival managers to become more professional in their
approach to event management. Professionalism was assessed in various
ways: use of business plans, event managers or consultants, success in
securing corporate sponsorship, plans to share resources with other events
(i.e. websites, online ticketing systems, databases or supplies), use of
famous performers and generation of local trade or demand for music-
related services. While some of these tactics could well increase revenue,
they also run the risk of undermining the morale of a volunteer committee,
reducing the participation of local, amateur musicians and increasing
rivalry between events.
There was some evidence that the emphasis of government funding
agencies on tourism gains could undermine the local networks and ele-
ments that contribute the most to these events. The organisers of Ten Days
in the Towers valued the inclusive nature of the event in line with the Aus-
tralian spirit of ‘having a go’. While amateur performances given by chil-
dren had a limited public audience, the committee believed that support
for young artists helped strengthen the tradition of Australian country
music. However, one respondent was concerned that this emphasis on
amateur performances inhibited the festival’s potential for tourism devel-
opment: she saw the festival as almost immutable to change and cited con-
servatism, as well lack of time and expertise, as factors threatening
survival.
The committee has anxieties about change and argues that attempts to
copy other, more commercial country music festivals would result in the
loss of local idiosyncrasies. In recent years, the event has had to grapple
with a decline in audience figures. Some form of change became a neces-
sity. The name Ten Days in the Towers was conceived and today it oper-
ates as an umbrella brand for three different festivals. The packaging of the
events for tourist consumption was designed to secure grant aid. In effect,
one group wrestled control of branding from other parties, which is at
odds with the notion of cooperation, partnership or community cohesion.
In the case of the AFCM, its attempts to build connections and
exchanges with tourism, leisure and entertainment industries gave rise to
tensions. Care had to be taken to ensure that the new festival programmes
did not obscure the core audience that it addressed. The underlying prior-
ity was always to maintain high artistic standards and ensure that chamber
music would not be compromised by the attempts to popularise the festival
programme.
Co-branding/packaging of festival for consumption

One theme that emerged from the analysis was the importance of networks
for branding and the packaging of events for tourist consumption. Packag-
ing in the context of this study refers not simply to packaged tours, but to
themes, images and concepts that seduce visitors and engender strong emo-
tions. The promoters of Opera in the Outback wished to deliver an unfor-
gettable experience to the audience. They developed an alliance with the
state opera company, whose reputation was crucial as regards to setting
quality standards and attracting a larger audience. As mentioned previ-
ously, the branding strategy developed by Ten Days in the Towers was
designed to appeal to the tourist market and it signalled that an array of
experiences was available over a 10-day period. Likewise, the AFCM
developed new concepts to enrich tourism experiences and a comment
was:
I think that these days, in the world that we live in, people want
options, people want to do different things. The festival has been going
for a long time. You need to introduce new things, to give people
options, to ensure that the program every year is different and
interesting.
Entry into networks was also important for learning, especially about ideas
for the development of the festival programme. The manager of the Ten
Days in the Towers event, for example, spent time at other country music
festivals volunteering in order to gather ideas to bring back to his own
event. The analysis shows how forging contacts with the local business
community enhanced the viability of the event. In order to build goodwill,
the manager organised free live music performances for hoteliers during
the year. In return, locals showed their support in numerous ways: spon-
soring the festival, organising their own talent quests and themed dinners,
dressing up in cowboy regalia and decorating shop windows. This engage-
ment with local business helped ensure that there was a good atmosphere
and led to spin-off events.
Implications of strong ties within artistic networks

The festivals were founded by individuals who were passionate about
music and who developed strong relationships with musicians. Strong ties
helped nurture talent, sustain musical traditions and build a reputation.
In the case of the AFCM, the founder had strong personal networks that
were crucial to the development of the festival. One of the biggest chal-
lenges for any arts festival is its entrance on to the international music
stage. In most cases, it is not a simply a question of earning money but of
prestige and recognition. The General Manager spoke about the impor-
tance of understanding artists, for example their need to rehearse, rest
between performances and have time to go sightseeing. The festival has
strong connections with the educational sector. Every year students from
schools and the local university participate in master classes and perform
concerts.
In the case of Ten Days in the Towers, the event has led to increased
music activity in the town on a year-round basis. Strong ties with local
country music groups helped nurture the talent needed for the event and
encouraged locals to continue to support the event. In the case of the
Opera in the Outback event, strong friendship ties resulted in positive
word-of-mouth advertising: ‘We have become such good friends with all
of the Opera singers and performers. Their opera singers absolutely loved
the event, they raved about it. They go back and say how wonderful it is
all is.
Implications of weak ties: production of an innovative festival
programme
The data show that the cultivation of weak ties facilitates the development
of an innovative festival programme. In the case of the AFCM, the inter-
action between the board of management and the local business sphere
was a key inspiration for the development of the programme. Examples of
innovation include themed dinners (Chef’s in the North) and guest speaker
talks on current issues (Reef Talks). A good example of networking with
complementary firms is the Outback Tour, deriving from the AFCM,
which brought together a diversity of services: transport, food, accommo-
dation and chamber music. This tour was designed to appeal to the
hedonic motivations of visitors, those from southern Australia who sought
a winter escape to the tropics. Innovation is also shown in the formation
of new artistic partnerships and the fusion of different musical traditions.
The festival features performances from a local ‘Dance North’ company
and from well known indigenous (didgeridoo) musicians. Themed concerts
(Symphony under the Stars, Concert on Orpheus Island) were introduced
and innovation is exemplified by the use of unusual sites to host perform-
ances. In practical terms, staging productions outdoors poses challenges
such as potential damage to equipment from salt water, acoustics and
transport. Given the inconvenience to artists, the island concert was subse-
quently abandoned even though it was commercially viable. These attempts
to enrich the festival programme and communicate local identity were
acknowledged by Arts Queensland. A comment was ‘the festival is distinc-
tive and unique to the region . . . it connects thematically with the location,
with its environment and history’.
Conclusions and implications

Attempts were made by all festival organisers to draw on, and communic-
ate, local resources and values, in the festival programme, which contrib-
utes to social capital building. This finding is consistent with the literature,
which shows a clear pattern linking the degree of local resident involve-
ment as participants, organisers and audience members to the magnitude
and range of positive impacts (Derrett, 2003; Moscardo, 2005). Other
studies showing the importance of cultivating local contacts for communi-
cating ‘local identity’ and ‘local values’ (Green, 2002; cited by Quinn,
2005, p. 249) support this research.
The study revealed that the board of management plays a key role in
connecting people one would not otherwise expect to be connected and in
providing a festival with the skills and expertise to host special events. This
is an example of bridging social capital, which refers to open networks and
to our connections with people who are unlike us (see Patulny & Svend-
sen, 2007, for a review). The importance of weak ties for access to greater
variety of information is shown in this study. Distant contacts play a
crucial role in the diffusion of innovation since they are privy to informa-
tion that one’s immediate circle does not have (Granovetter, 1973). Noote-
boom (1999) has put forward a similar argument, claiming that weak ties
can lead to the incorporation of diverse points of view.
In the literature, attempts have been made to extend Granovetter’s
concept of weak ties through the notion of weak-and-lasting ties (Grabher,
2004). In the literature on festival management, the transient nature of fes-
tivals is often a problem. Festivals are short-term events that aside from
memories leave little in their wake (Gibson & Connell, 2003). Festivals
suffer from the ‘out of sight, out of mind’ syndrome during the year, which
can undercut the raising of funds (Walle, 2003, p. 78). Consequently,
weak-and-lasting ties are linked to the sustainability of cultural tourism
projects (Baerenholdt & Haldrup, 2006).
This study is consistent with the literature on cultural enterprises that
associate dense networks with the attraction of resources (Kong, 2005;
Scott, 2000), in particular, access to complementary resources (Bagdadli,
2003). An important finding is that increasing density demands time, a
commodity that is in short supply for community-driven, volunteer-
dependent festivals. The analysis revealed pressures on festival managers to
adopt institutional norms as well as frictions between tourism and com-
munity interests. These findings are consistent with the literature. Scholars
highlight the fragile nature of networks (Baerenholdt & Haldrup, 2006)
and show how the multidimensionality of networks can present conflicts
and power struggles (Larson, 2002). Likewise, the literature on festival
tourism reveals tensions between community and commercial perspectives
(Gibson et al., 2005; Quinn, 2005) and conflicts over national and place
identity (Gibson & Davidson, 2004).
This study is valuable because it helps powerful stakeholders, those who
exert financial clout, understand what is happening in the network and
sensitises them to conflicts, and in this way also suggests ways of managing
networks, perhaps by adopting the role of mediator and mentor rather
than the voice of authority. On a policy level, if weak ties are privileged
over strong ties, and direct economic impacts are privileged over the socio-
cultural impacts, then this shift runs the risk of creating a gulf between
music and tourism, generating pressures towards compromise, which, in
the long run, could result in local support falling away.
References
Arcodia, C. & Whitford, M. (2007). Festival attendance the development of social
capital. Journal of Convention and Event Tourism, 8(2), 1–18.
Baerenholdt, J. & Haldrup, M. (2006). Mobile networks and place-making in cul-
tural tourism: Staging Viking ships and rock music in Roskilde. European Urban
and Regional Studies, 13(3), 209–224.
Bagdadli, S. (2003). Museum and theatre networks in Italy: Determinants and
typology. International Journal of Arts Management, 6(1), 19–30.
Burt, R. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Derrett, R. (2003). Making sense of how festivals demonstrate a community’s sense
of place. Event Management, 8(1), 49–58.
Di Maggio, P. J. & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional iso-
morphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociologi-
cal Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of
Getz, D. (1991). Festivals, special events and tourism. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Getz, D., Andersson, T. & Larson, M. (2007). Festival stakeholder roles: Concepts
and case studies. Event Management, 10(2), 103–122.
Gibson, A., Lynch, P. & Morrison, A. (2005). The local destination tourism
network: Development issues. Tourism and Hospitality Planning and Develop-
ment, 2(2), 87–99.
Gibson, C. & Connell, J. (2003). On the road again: Music and tourism. Clevedon:
Channel View Press.
Gibson, C. & Davidson, D. (2004). Tamworth, Australia’s ‘country music capital’:
Place marketing, rurality, and resident reactions. Journal of Rural Studies, 20(4),
387–404.
Gilsing, V. & Nooteboom, B. (2005). Density and strength of ties in innovation
networks: An analysis of multimedia and biotechnology. European Management
Review, 2(3), 179–197.
Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
Glow, H., Minahan, S. & Gahan, P. (2005). Dying in the arts: Creativity as meta-
phor. Proceedings of the 19th ANZAM Conference: Engaging the multiple con-
texts of management – convergence and divergence of management theory and
practice, School of Management, University of Technology, Sydney, New South
Wales.
Grabher, G. (2004). Learning in projects, remembering in networks. European
Urban and Regional Studies, 11(2), 103–123.
Grabher, G. & Ibert, O. (2006). Bad company? The ambiguity of personal know-
ledge networks. Journal of Economic Geographic, 6(3), 251–271.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology,
78(6), 1360–1380.
Green, G. L. (2002). Marketing the nation: Carnival and tourism in Trinidad and
Tobago. Critique of Anthropology, 22(3), 283–304.
Gursoy, D., Kim, K. & Uysal, M. (2004). Perceived impacts of festivals and special
events by organizers: An extension and validation. Tourism Management, 25(2),
171–181.
Hall, C. (1992). Hallmark tourist events: Impacts, management and planning. New
York: Halsted Press.
Hall, C., Cambourne, B., Macionis, N. & Johnson, G. (1997). Wine tourism and
network development in Australia and New Zealand: Review, establishment and
prospects. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 9(2/3), 5–28.
Janiskee, R. (1996). Historic homes and special events. Annals of Tourism
Research, 23(2), 398–414.
Kong, L. (2005). The sociality of cultural industries: Hong Kong’s cultural policy
and film industry. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 11(1), 61–76.
Larson, M. (2002). A political approach to relationship marketing: Case study of
the Storsjoyran festival. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(2),
119–143.
Matheson, C. M. (2005). Festivity and sociability: A study of a Celtic music festi-
val. Tourism, Culture and Communication, 5(3), 149–163.
Michael, E. (2007). Micro-clusters and networks: The growth of tourism. Elsevier:
Oxford.
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Analyzing qualitative data: A source
book for new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Morrison, A., Lynch, P. & Johns, N. (2004). International tourism networks. Inter-
national Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(3), 197–202.
Moscardo, G. (2005). Peripheral tourism development: Challenges, issues and
success factors. Tourism Recreation Research, 30(1), 27–44.
Moscardo, G., McCarthy, B., Murphy, L. & Pearce, P. (2009). The importance of
networks in special interest tourism: Case studies of music tourism in Australia.
International Journal of Tourism Policy, 2(1/2), 5–23.
Nooteboom, B. (1999). Inter-firm alliances: Analysis and design. London:
Routledge.
O’Kelly, E. (2007). The value of the arts: The case for elitism. Dublin: The Arts
Council.
Paleo, I. O. & Wijnberg, N. M. (2006). Classification of popular music festivals: A
typology of festivals and an inquiry into their role in the construction of music
genres. International Journal of Arts Management, 8(2), 50–81.
Patulny, R. & Svendsen, G. (2007). Exploring the social capital grid: Binding,
bridging, qualitative, quantitative. International Journal of Sociology and Social
Policy, 27(1/2), 32–51.
Pavlovich, K. (2003). The evolution and transformation of a tourism destination
network: The Waitomo Caves, New Zealand. Tourism Management, 24(2),
203–216.
Putnam, R. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Quinn, B. (2005). Changing festival places: Insights from Galway. Social and Cul-
tural Geography, 6(2), 237–252.
Rutten, R. (2004). Inter-firm knowledge creation: A re-appreciation of embedded-
ness from a relational perspective. European Planning Studies, 12(5), 659–673.
Scott, A. J. (2000). The cultural economy of cities. London: Sage.
Shih, H. (2006). Network characteristics of drive tourism destinations: An applica-
tion of network analysis in tourism. Tourism Management, 27(5), 1029–1039.
Stokes, R. (2005). Network-based strategy making for events tourism. European
Journal of Marketing, 40(5/6), 682–695.
Tinsley, R. & Lynch, P. (2001). Small tourism business networks and destination
development. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 20(4), 367–378.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic
performance of organisations: The network effect. American Sociological
Review, 61(4), 674–698.
Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in inter-firm networks: The
paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.
Van Zyl, C. & Botha, C. (2004). Motivational factors of local residents to attend
the Aardlop National Arts festival. Event Management, 8(4), 213–222.
Walle, A. (2003). Building a diverse attendance at cultural festivals: Embracing oral
history/folklore in strategic ways. Event Management, 8(2), 73–82.
7 Destination brand licensing
Michał Żemła
Introduction
Tourism destination management is a complicated task that needs often
specific tools that are difficult to be copied directly from the rich and devel-
oped recourses of firm management. Destination branding (DB) has
recently become one of the most popular topics among tourism research-
ers. It has been recognized that ‘branding is perhaps the most powerful
marketing weapon available to contemporary destination marketers’
(Morgan & Pritchard, 2002, p. 11). However, the concept of DB seems to
be vulnerable for strong criticism from different points of view, with prob-
ably the strongest argument given by Mundt, who goes so far, that he
neglects the existence of a marketing tool that could be named ‘destination
branding’, at least with regard to traditionally understood tourism destina-
tions (Mundt, 2004). Also some other researchers point out numerous
weaknesses of DB regarding its theoretical foundation (Seaton, 1997; Tasci
& Kozak, 2006). Further on, absence of commonly accepted theory of DB
might lead destination management practitioners to conduct chaotic and
not efficient actions.
This chapter, though, is aimed at underlining some potentials of DB that
have not so far been strongly presented in tourism research literature,
which should partially respond to arguments raised by critics of the
concept. This is possible thanks to incorporating other popular concepts
like relationship marketing, clustering or networking into DB ground.
Those concepts, although popular among destination management
researchers, have not been so far analyzed from the DB point of view. The
chapter, looking for DB enhancement possibilities in other theoretical con-
cepts, as well as in destination marketing practice, is actually not present-
ing new ways of branding of tourism places. On the contrary, there are
examples of actions that are convergent with the concept presented here of
destination brand licensing (DBL), known for many years, but a proper
theoretical description seems to be missing. DBL is a new concept and has
not so far been presented in the literature. Presented examples are chosen
purposely to picture a variety of implementation of DBL actions in differ-
Destination brand licensing 89
ent countries and in different conditions. Those actions are also imple-
mented by different entities ranging from destination management
organizations (DMOs) and public authorities to private sector companies.
Literature review
All those researchers who present their doubts about propriety of the term
DB, originate their doubts from the comparison of branding of consumer
goods – the motherland of branding concept – with the nature of DB
(Mundt, 2004; Seaton, 1997). Seaton states:
The concept has a number of fundamental problems because of intrac-

table differences between destinations and other kinds of tourism
product. . . . A successful brand emerges from the design of homoge-
nous product, correctly priced, distributed and promoted to a defined
market segment. Most of these requirements are impossible for desti-
nation marketers’.
(Seaton, 1997, p. 367)
Further, Seaton presents three most important reasons for such a situation,
namely: (1) absence of a homogeneous product, (2) impossibility for desti-
nation marketers to set prices or control distribution system, (3) embracing
with one brand offers targeted at very different markets, and promoted
often through a single campaign. (Seaton, 1997). This list is even pro-
longed by Mundt (2004), who adds among others, difficulties with pro-
ducer identification, very limited influence on the product possessed by
destination management as well as only indirect quality control, and legal
reasons connected with European legislation exempting geographically
defined areas from branding.
Presented arguments definitely prove that DB differs considerably from
the concept of branding created for consumer goods. However, would it
mean that DB differs too much from consumer goods branding to be called
branding at all, as suggested by Mundt? It seems to be questionable, and
not possible to answer that question without any doubts. Further consider-
ation of this dispute seems to be idle, as it concentrates more on terminol-
ogy than on the actual nature of DB. Nevertheless, the commonly agreed
concept of comparison of branding in consumer goods context with brand-
ing in tourism destination context is missing (Tasci & Kozak, 2006).
Much more attention should be devoted to the dispute on what DB
really is, as the term, although commonly used, seems to remain unclear
and ambiguous. The problem begins with the absence of a commonly
accepted definition of DB (Mundt 2004, p. 47) but is much deeper. Two
recently published studies of experts’ opinions on the nature of destination
branding (Park & Petrick, 2006; Tasci & Kozak, 2006) reveal that the
concept of DB is regarded not to be much different from destination image
90 M. Żemła
building and those two are vulnerable to be confused. Park and Petrick
wonder if ‘DB might be “old wine in a new bottle” ’ (2006, p. 264).
Conclusions reached by Hankinson (2003) on the basis of review of 20
recently published papers on DB are very much the same. He finds four
possible perspectives on DB, (1) brands as perceptual entities, (2) brands as
communicators, (3) brands as relationships and (4) brands as value
enhancers; but the most of reviewed papers fell into group 1 or 2. What is
more, basing on his earlier research (Hankinson, 2001), he states:
The dominance of perceptual perspective has seriously limited the

development of destination brands. . . . Destinations which focus purely
on brands as a perceptual entity or as a communicator fail to address
the issues associated with organizational structure and managerial
control. . . . The success of cities . . . in building successful brands . . .
was based upon the development of strong relationship between stake-
holders who would benefit from the success.
(Hankinson 2003, p. 114)
It is not surprising that DB is so often limited to image building, remem-

bering Mundt’s statement that ‘although these [destination marketing]
organizations tend to term their activities “marketing”, it is evident that
only the communication sub-mix of the classical marketing instruments, to
a certain extent, is regularly in their hand’ (Mundt, 2004, p. 46). However,
one has to remember that the brand image is what makes a brand equity.
Though contemporary practice of DB is one sided, it is concentrated on its
most important aspect. However, brand promotion based on presenting
picturesque landscape or other natural or historical tourist attractions
(Crockett & Wood, 1999; Morgan, Pritchard & Piggott, 2003) has to be
conducted with the awareness of potential economic benefits to be gained
thanks to tourism development, which has to be connected with existence
and participation of companies catering for tourists (Thomas & Long,
2000).
Destination brand licensing

In perceptual approach destination brand is usually treated as an umbrella
brand, upon which service providers might promote and sell their products
(Flagestad & Hope, 2001). However, Middleton in his classic textbook,
points with regard to national tourism organizations that this approach
may lead to limited effects due to several limitations. Among others, he
names limited resources being at National Tourism Organizations’ (NTOs)
disposal, and the fact that messages prepared by NTOs are not the only
promotional messages that create an inducted image of a destination.
Indeed, actions taken by a private sector or tourism regions and locations
influence it. Seeing this, Middleton suggests looking for better effects in
backing private sector marketing actions by NTOs in numerous situations
(Middleton, 1994). This was one of the first remarks in literature giving
such a clear indication of the uncontested role of private entrepreneurs in
destination marketing, image building and indirectly DB.
There are few contemporary attempts to build a new model of DB,
which also are based on or at least acknowledge this role. They look for
inspiration in various theoretical concepts. Van’t Klooster, Go and van
Baalen (2004) use the concept of relationship marketing, and especially
Customer Relationship Management to create what they call destination
brand community. As a starting point, they take Gnoth’s (Gnoth) concept
of three kinds of attributes of destination branding. The first is connected
with attractions that exert the pull to a destination, the second with brand-
ing the essential tourism services and the third with brand extension into
non-tourism branches (van’t Klooster et al., 2004). This concept clearly
utilizing a multi-stakeholder approach to DB can be used effectively when
proper identification and management of their interrelations is imple-
mented. This is the starting point of relationship marketing utilization in
DB. Even though Fayall, Callod and Edwards (2003) state that relation-
ship marketing remains an untested concept for destination marketers
despite its increasing maturity in the literature, this concept is suitable for
destination management practice, and was widely introduced by Fyall and
Garrod (2005), Fayall et al. (2003) and Riege, Perry and Go (2001).
The concept of partnership marketing is also a cornerstone of the model
offered by Hankinson (2003), which is the consequence of taking destina-
tion brand as relationships perspective. Traditionally regarded elements of
DB, such as brand personality, positioning and reality, constitute the core
brand, which yet has to be strengthened by numerous relationships with
and between stakeholders that include primary service providers, media,
infrastructure operators and consumers. These relationships are dynamic
and evolve over the time (Hankinson, 2003).
Another very comprehensive model is presented by Gnoth (2004). The
basic idea of the model is an assumption that tourism destination, despite
some important differences, can be managed in a similar way to virtual
service firms, which means a network of enterprises that are using
resources jointly, and which organize their cooperation in a joint effort
(Gnoth, 2004). There are numerous consequences of this assumption.
There exists a generic product of tourism destination – travel experience –
that has to be branded. The role of tourism small- and medium-sized enter-
prises (SMEs) located at destinations has changed. Usually they are
perceived as only consultants of destination branding, which may ulti-
mately benefit the brand, but they do not participate in marketing actions
taken for destination brand promotion (Morgan et al., 2003). After accept-
ing Gnoth’s model, tourism SMEs find themselves inside the process of DB
and become contributors of important parts of the product, and they have
to work under the brand and exercise all its advantages and weaknesses.
92 M. Żemła
Gnoth’s model clearly takes some inspiration from Porter’s cluster concept
(Porter, 1985); however, there is an important difference. Application of a
virtual service firm model postulates existence of a focal company, which
has more power and control over the product and plays also the role of a
leader in internal communication with other SMEs.
Gnoth’s model seems to be the first attempt to utilize the cluster concept
in the DB ground. Tourism destinations have been from the very beginning
a tempting area of implementing the cluster theory. Porter, giving examples
of clusters identified by him and his colleagues provided some examples of
tourism clusters. Furthermore, Jackson and Murphy (2002) gave a com-
prehensive lecture about possibilities and advantages of such utilization.
Many researchers then implemented cluster analysis into tourism destina-
tions ground (da Cunha & da Cunha, 2005; Jackson & Murphy, 2006;
Nordin, 2003; Weiermair & Steinhauser, 2003). Usually, cluster analysis
concentrated on economic impact and innovation, and competitiveness
issues do not cover typical managerial problems such as branding.
However, a very interesting exception can be found in works by Hawkins
(2004a, b). When analyzing possibilities of enhancing the competitiveness
of World Heritage Cluster in Indonesia, he suggests the use of eight coop-
erative tools, among which branding plays an important role.
Examples of destination brand licensing

A common feature of models presented above is the fact that all of them
are theoretical concepts without its exemplification or implementation to
DB practice. Even practical advice given by Hawkins with regard to spe-
cific destinations (World Heritage Sites in Indonesia) cannot be treated as
an exception, since they are rather suggestions of what to do rather than a
description of how it is working in practice. A theoretical concept of DBL
has been created in a different way. Examples of DB practice were found,
and then their common features were pointed out. Due to this, DBL cannot
be treated as an untested concept. However, the theory is not as coherent
and developed as models presented above, because found examples often
differ from each other. In addition, it is difficult to find an example from
DB practice that embraces all suggested features of successful DBL.
To root the concept of DBL in existing DB theory, Hankinson’s model
is used. Usually, works on DB deal with what is called here ‘core brand’,
and DBL is dedicated to be a practical tool for relationships management,
especially primary services relationships. According to Hankinson, without
a positive relationship with these service providers, the core brand is diffi-
cult to establish (Hankinson, 2003). It is postulated that effective creation
of primary services relationships is possible by developing a network such
as a cluster or virtual service firm, which should embrace tourism SMEs
working under a common brand. The key role has to be played by a sound
destination’s tourism leadership, which might be conveyed by a focal
company, local/regional/national authorities or a destination management
organization (DMO), or any other organization having necessary
resources, knowledge and authority. This leader is the brand creator,
designs brand personality and positioning, and specifies requirements that
must be met by a product sold under the brand. Also promotion of the
brand is under the responsibility of the leader. Finally, the leader licenses
this brand to particular SMEs accepting the rules. Contrary to the tradi-
tionally understood process of brand licensing regarding destinations, this
does not necessarily involve any fees to be paid by licensee. Below several
examples of DBL are presented.
Branding actions taken by Tirol Werbung – the regional tourism organi-
zation for the Austrian Tirol Lander – are based on the process of market-
ing research, looking for specific tourists’ needs that can be satisfied in
Tirol. The next step is to decide on how to satisfy those needs best in order
to create a list of requirements that have to be met by accommodation
facilities, or other tourism facilities, which would decide on serving the
researched market segment. A new logo and brand name are created then
to embrace SMEs joined to the network. A specification list, logo and
brand name constitute an offer for regional tourism companies, which are
welcomed to join the brand network under conditions of total fulfillment
of stated requirements proved by the audit conducted by Tirol Werbung at
the beginning, and then yearly. In exchange, Tyrolean SMEs that entered
the brand network are provided with a full package of promotional actions
(especially, website, brochures and representation during travel fairs) con-
ducted for a network as a whole, accompanied with significant distribution
support – Tirol Werbung works as a travel office, which advises customers
and makes reservations for them. Among successful brands Tirol Vital
Active (wellness) or Tirol ohne Handicap (disabled tourism) can be pointed
out. Similar actions conducted on the national level by the Austrian
National Tourism Organization are presented by Seaton (1997).
Porta Lubavia is a new brand created by county authorities in Kami-
enna Góra, located in the Sudety Mountains in southern Poland. The
brand name is a Latin name of this area situated on a Roman track to
Northern Europe. The brand name has been created to escape from the
image of the town of Kamienna Góra, perceived by many Poles as a heavy
industry area, where especially coal mining developed in the nearby
Wałbrzych county. Utilization of this brand and its subbrand, Zielone
Dome (Green Houses) is offered to county farmers setting their agrotour-
ism activity. Established in 2005, Porta Lubavia is currently examining
tough greenness of a brand. So far, only about ten entrepreneurs have
entered the network, and even those already participating in the program
remain passive. Sometimes, the brand name and logo are not even pre-
sented on the accommodation facility. Moreover, it is difficult to enhance
a closer cooperation between program members, including information
about and recommendation of services provided by other members. Actual
94 M. Żemła
and potential members simply do not see benefits from being branded, as a
promotional campaign is missing and the Porta Lubavia brand remains
totally unknown to Poles. Needless to say, even a good Internet site is not
enough to change this situation.
The idea of Valašske Kralovstvi (Wallachian Kingdom) brand in the
Czech Republic differs considerably from those presented above. The
brand has been established by a private promotion agency, and embraces
the historical region without regard to the present administrative borders.
The important part of this project is the Wallachian passport, which might
be bought by a tourist in tourist agencies and similar places throughout the
region. Provided with such a passport, the tourist is entitled to make use of
several discounts on tourism services in the region, which include accom-
modation, gastronomy, museums and other tourism attractions. In return,
tourism facilities may use the Valašske Kralovstvi brand in their promo-
tion, and are promoted in a special guidebook attached to the Wallachian
passport. Additionally, the brand has created a very promising market of
branded souvenirs based mainly on traditional art and craft of the region.
The Valašske Kralovstvi brand owes its success to a very interesting and
amusing personality, patronage of well-known Czech stars and popular
events. Presented here, the solution is very close to city cards offered in
many cities, but involves much more sophisticated branding actions.
Further examples of actions fulfilling the criteria of DBL can be found
in the tourism literature. Woods and Deegan (2003) present the case of the
French district of Aude, where authorities have created a brand named
Pays Cathare, referring to a medieval sect acting in the south of France.
This brand is offered voluntarily to all regional entrepreneurs catering for
tourists, including producers of traditional regional food. The strengths of
this brand are connected with the emphasis on cooperation between
members and quality assurance. Projects regarding tourism routes can also
be included in DBL practice. This is actually what has taken place in
Malokarpatska Vinna Cesta (Small Carpathians Wine Route) in Slovakia,
the Niagara Wine Route in the USA and Canada (Telfer, 2001) or famous
pilgrimage routes to Santiago the Compostella, Spain.
Strengths and limitations of destination brand licensing

DBL can be an efficient way of enhancing a destination’s tourism economy.
Seaton (1997, p. 368), presenting the actions taken by the Austrian
National Tourism Organization, states that accommodation facilities that
were members of branded consortia obtained a 10 percent higher occupa-
tion rate than nonmembers, even though they set their prices higher by 16
percent. Similar findings concerning the Pays Cathare brand are presented
by Woods and Deegan (2003), where they also describe the positive effect
of brand implementation on the economy of the whole district due to
having other industries involved, besides hospitality only.
From the theoretical point of view, DBL makes many of the objections
regarding DB presented in the earlier parts of the chapter not actual any
more. There exists a generic homogeneous product that is branded and
over which the brand creator has some control. However, the level of this
control is obviously not so high as in consumer goods. There is a possibil-
ity of targeting the branded product to a specific market segment like that
presented in the Tirol Werbung example since one destination may simul-
taneously create more than one brand, among which each is dedicated to
satisfy different tourists’ needs.
DBL also widens the spectrum of branding tools accessible for destination
marketers, in which naming is the most important. Destination brand name
is not fixed any more. Destination marketers may create a brand name to give
an impression about the nature of a branded product that becomes an aspect
of great importance among big companies (see for example Holloway &
Robinson, 1995). However, proper naming is a challenging task because
when creating a new brand, often an artificial brand name, the potential con-
sumers may be misled because they do not know where the product is
located. Where Valašske Kralovstvi is may be obvious for Czech tourists, but
this brand name will mean nothing to most international tourists. Another
example of a misleading brand name is Pays Cathare, as the Cathares used to
live in the area much wider than the contemporary district. This brand name
is also misleading with a view to what visitors may expect is branded under
the name of Pays Cathare. One may expect some old castles, churches or
monasteries rather than the agrotourism dominated offer, as it is in reality.
The best examples of successful naming seem to be Tyrolean brands since
they inform precisely about the localization and the nature of product.
When offering several brands, destination marketers should also think
about a proper branding strategy. Apart from the family brand strategy, an
individual brand and combined brand strategy are available as well. Espe-
cially, the combined brand strategy, becoming more and more popular in
many different markets (including tourism companies), should be taken
into consideration by destination marketers. Again, a very convincing
example can be found in the Tirol Werbung practice where the family part
of the combined brand refers to geographical area, making sure potential
visitors can locate it properly, while the individual part informs about the
nature of the product.
Another branding tool possible to use thanks to DBL is brand licensing
itself, understood as a way of popularization and spread of a brand
without direct investments of its owner. However, in DBL, relations
between a licensee and a licenser are more complex than just selling the
right to use the brand. Especially when the brand owner is a non-profit
organization like local authorities or destination marketing organizations,
the licenser may not get any financial benefits from brand licensing. There
is no doubt that the aim of DBL is not connected with geographical spread
of the brand, like it is in ‘traditional’ brand licensing.
96 M. Żemła
Nevertheless, it has to be mentioned that there are also some limitations
and doubts concerning DBL. First, it has to be underlined once more that
DBL licensing cannot be treated as an alternative tool to destination brand
positioning or creating a brand personality. The destination brand to be
licensed has to be well positioned and to have its personality, which is the
consequence of accepting Hankinson’s model. One may wonder if the
actions proposed here are still destination branding, or should be called
something else, which would indicate tourism SMEs branding (for
example, tourism clusters branding). Actually, there are always several
tourism companies at a destination that decide not to enter the network,
and therefore are excluded from the brand. They have to be treated as the
main competitors of a branded network. There is no convincing answer to
this question, like to the question posed by Mundt, whether the ‘destina-
tion branding’ term should be used at all.
Licensing a destination’s brand poses some additional difficulties in
comparison with licensing brands of other types. Usually, the brand to be
licensed has to be established and to have an unquestionable value to
become the subject of demand for entrepreneurs. In a destination practice,
DMOs, local authorities or other brand creators cannot establish the brand
before licensing it. On the contrary, licensing seems to be the only way to
establish the brand that tourism SMEs would like to buy or at least use
under strict conditions, which means that those companies that enter the
network at the beginning have to show a high level of trust to the brand
owner. This explains partially troubles with the Porta Lubavia brand, as
generally in Poland entrepreneurs do not tend to trust authorities and are
rather unwilling to cooperate. A quite different situation may be observed
in Austria where local democracy and the role of local and regional author-
ities have been set for many years.
It is necessary to list possible negative effects of DBL. Enhancing inter-
firm cooperation at a destination is generally a required action; however,
too close cooperation may lead to some practices being disadvantageous
for consumers, and even bordering the area of illegal competitive practices
like, for example, price collusions. Among benefits gained thanks to DBL
by SMEs acting in the brand network, Seaton (1997) points to higher
prices than those in similar facilities from outside the network. Creation
and effective actions of the promotional alliance of major hotels in Warsaw
(Warsaw Destination Alliance), aimed at pulling more tourists to the city,
resulted also in significant increases of prices.
Finally, both presented examples and common sense, suggest that DBL
is suitable for destinations of one kind while is not perfect for others. DBL
may work properly at the local or regional level (possibly small rather
homogeneous countries like Austria), rather than at the level of big differ-
entiated countries. Moreover, it will work much better at destinations
where small accommodation facilities and other tourism companies
prevail, while it may not be useful in places with a limited number of big
companies, which may be less interested in destination branding as they
can establish their own strong brands.

In order to become an established theory, DBL needs a thorough scientific
discussion, as well as further investigation into practical examples that will
present different possible ways of implementing it. Both practical benefits
and theoretical enhancement should be further deeply examined. The list
of examples presented in this chapter cannot be treated as complete or
even representative since it plays rather an illustrative role, and further
research seems to be necessary. Preparation of the model and optimal
implementation of DBL can be pointed out as another aspect for research.
When analyzing the examples presented above, the Austrian one seems to
offer the best solution; however, it cannot be yet stated definitely whether
that example may be treated as a model for practitioners implementing
DBL. Finally, there is a need for further research on proper theoretical
interpretation and deep analyses of practical examples of DBL, where
emphasis should be laid on several single actions or aspects of DBL prac-
tice, and not on the example as a whole, like in this chapter.
References
Crockett, S. R. & Wood, L. J. (1999). Brand Western Australia: A totally inte-
grated approach to destination branding. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 5(3),
276–289.
da Cunha, S. K. & da Cunha, J. C. (2005). Tourism cluster competitiveness and
sustainability: Proposal for systematic model to measure the impact of tourism
local development. Brazilian Administration Review, 2(2), 47–62.
Fyall, A., Callod, C. & Edwards, B. (2003). Relationship marketing: The challenge
for destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(3), 644–659.
Fyall, A. & Garrod, B. (2005). Tourism marketing: A collaborative approach.
Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Flagestad, A. & Hope, C. A. (2001). Scandinavian winter: Antecedents, concepts
and empirical observations underlying a destination umbrella branding model.
Tourism Review, 56(1/2), 5–14.
Gnoth, J. (2002). Leveraging export brands through a tourism destination brand.
Journal of Brand Management, 9(4–5), 262–280.
Gnoth, J. (2004). Strengthening tourism SME brands. In U. Fueglistaller, T. Volery
& W. Weber (Eds.), Value creation in entrepreneurship and SMEs. St. Gallen,
Switzerland: University of St. Gallen. Retrieved March 30, 2008, from: http://
www.kmu.unisg.ch/rencontres/RENC2004/band2004.html.
Hankinson, G. (2001). Location branding: A study of 12 English cities. Journal of
Brand Management, 9(2), 127–142.
Hankinson, G. (2003). Relational network brands: Toward a conceptual model of
place brands. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10(2), 109–121.
Hawkins, D. E. (2004a). A protected areas ecotourism competitive cluster approach
98 M. Żemła
to catalyze biodiversity conservation and economic growth in Bulgaria. Journal
of Sustainable Tourism, 12(3), 219–224.
Hawkins, D. E. (2004b). Sustainable tourism competitiveness clusters: Application
to World Heritage Sites network development in Indonesia. Asia Pacific Journal
of Tourism Research, 9(3), 293–307.
Holloway, J. C. & Robinson, C. (1995). Marketing for tourism. London:
Longman.
Jackson, J. & Murphy, P. (2002). Tourism destinations as clusters: Analytical expe-
riences from the world. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 4(1), 36–52.
Jackson, J. & Murphy, P. (2006). Clusters in regional tourism: An Australian case.
van’t Klooster, E., Go, F. & van Baalen, P. (2004). Exploring destination brand
communities: A business model for collaboration in the extremely fragmented
tourism industry. Paper presented at the International Conference 17th Bled e
Commerce Conference e Global, Bled, Slovenia, June 21–23.
Middleton, V. T .C. (1994). Marketing in travel and tourism. Oxford: Butterworth
Heinemann.
Morgan, N. & Pritchard, A. (2002). Contextualizing destination branding. In N.
Morgan, A. Pritchard & R. Pride (Eds.), Destination branding: Creating the
unique destination proposition (pp. 11–41). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A. & Piggott, R. (2003). Destination branding and the role
of stakeholders: The case of New Zealand. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9(3),
285–299.
Mundt, J. (2004). Branding of myths and the myths of branding: Critical remarks
on the ‘branding’ of destinations. In S. Weber & R. Tomljenović (Eds.), Rein-
venting a tourism destination: Facing the challenge (pp. 43–54). Zagreb: Institute
for Tourism.
Nordin, S. (2003). Tourism clustering and innovation. Oestersund: ETOUR, Mid-
Sweden University.
Park, S. & Petrick, J. F. (2006). Destinations’ perspectives on branding. Annals of
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press.
Riege, A. M., Perry, C. & Go, F. M. (2001). Partnerships in international travel
and tourism industry. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 11(1), 59–77.
Seaton, A. V. (1997). Destination marketing. In A. V. Seaton & M. M. Bennett
(Eds.), Marketing tourism products (pp. 350–373). London: Thomson Business
Press.
Tasci, A.D.A. & Kozak, M. (2006). Destination brands vs. destination images: Do
we know what we mean? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12(4), 299–317.
Telfer, D. J. (2001). Strategic alliances along the Niagara Wine Route. Tourism
Management, 22(1), 21–30.
Thomas, R. & Long, J. (2000). Improving competitiveness: Critical success factors
for tourism development. Local Economy, 14(4), 313–328.
Weiermair, K. & Steinhauser, C. (2003). New tourism clusters in the field of sports
and health: The case of Alpine wellness. Paper presented at the 12th Interna-
tional Tourism and Leisure Symposium, Barcelona, April.
Woods, M. & Deegan, J. (2003). A warm welcome for destination quality brand:
The example of Pays Cathare region. International Journal of Tourism Research,
5(4), 269–282.
8 Destinations as gadgets
Co-creating a sportive identity for
Voss
Szilvia Gyimóthy and Reidar Johan Mykletun
Introduction
Destination marketers face a number of challenges in the efforts to brand a
region, owing to a far more intricate context than the one corporate brand
managers operate in. They must balance stakeholder interests in a frag-
mented destination network and bridge the gap between the bureaucratic
cultures of public actors and the marketing cultures of private firms. Fur-
thermore, they must undertake a regional coordinating and representative
role in spite of limited ownership, budget or power to control how indi-
vidual firms deliver. Last, but not least, they must be alert to consumer
trends and look for innovative ways of involving new groups of customers
in order to develop the destination. This implies that destination branding
is a long-term, dialogue-based process (Schultz, Antorini & Csaba, 2006),
where the brand essence, values and personality of a place develops and
arises through interaction with an extended group of stakeholders. Desti-
nation marketers may act as facilitators, enablers or mediators in this
process, and sometimes, the process may partly (or entirely) bypass them.
This case study explores the organic repositioning of Voss, a Norwegian
inland destination, and thus captures a destination branding process side-
stepping the local tourism organisation. Region Voss is mostly character-
ised by a strong orientation towards active young consumers, using
contemporary popular cultural narratives to enhance tourist consumption.
Although the Voss Municipality Tourism Office promotes a traditional
rural imagery, a number of actors outside the DMO (local retailers, sports
clubs, entrepreneurs) interact in an innovative way to create a more youth-
ful and sportive identity – through a dynamic dialogue with tourists. The
goal of this chapter is to describe this dialogue by identifying key elements
in this mutual identity building process.
Literature review
Studies in destination branding have long recognised the mutual associ-
ations between local products and the place itself (Anholt, 2004; Csaba,
100 S. Gyimóthy and R. J. Mykletun
2005; Tasci & Kozak, 2006). Destination brands are conceptualised as
‘umbrella brands’ (Therkelsen, 2003) or even ‘house of brands’ (after
Aaker, 1996), defining a unanimous image (the brand essence) with the
symbolic power of a few flagship attractions and retail products. Myth-
makers of the tourism system (e.g. destination marketers, tour operators,
lifestyle magazines and travelogues) are increasingly presenting destina-
tions as shopping landscapes, featuring the unique product portfolio of a
region. In tertiary rural destinations, short of major attractions, these rep-
resentations are based on locally produced food, dishes or handicraft
deemed traditional and thus, typical to the region. This co-branding
endeavour is a result of a synergy between two simultaneous processes:
authentication (Miele & Murdoch, 2002) and aestheticisation (Welsch,
1996). Geographical earmarking, such as provenance labels, adds symbolic
qualities to consumer goods – warranting typicality, originality and even
exclusivity. At the same time, regions with no particular appeal or identity
are turned into imaginary places of ‘touristic terroirs’ (Hall & Mitchell,
2002), thanks to an aesthetic styling process. Hence, regions as well as
their products and other cultural expressions (folklore, eating habits, art
and crafts items) are commodified, that is, transformed into commercial
packages and merchandise for tourists (cf. Bell & Valentine, 1997; May,
1996; Scarpato & Daniele, 2003; Telfer & Hashimoto, 2003).
However, the rhetoric by which rural destinations are mobilised and
reinvented for tourism consumption is strikingly similar across Europe.
Regional cultural heritage is enshrined with the help of a few romantic
stereotypes, including iconic images of countryside idyll, organic farming
and rural nostalgia (Gyimóthy, 2005). Life in the countryside is euphe-
mised into an aesthetic still life of solidity, simplicity, genuineness and
timelessness. Mythmakers go along with the established imagery of tradi-
tional and friendly countryside, and seldom depict rural destinations as
cool, novel or fashionable. This tourism monotopia (Jensen & Richardson,
2003) may lead to interchangeable brand essences, reducing the diversity
of European rural destination imagery. For instance, as Frochot (2003)
notes, the way in which culinary heritage is presented in French regions
does not reflect the great variation in food ingredients, dishes and styles.
Furthermore, a nostalgic brand essence representing only ‘classic and safe’
products will uphold the image of a cultural sanctuary, which may ulti-
mately obstruct innovative development. Arguably, other arguments may
exist to attract visitors to the countryside than the rhetoric of authenticity
and lack of urbanisation. By failing to realise these alternatives, rural desti-
nations may risk losing touch with future consumer segments, especially,
cosmopolitan youth.
Taking the ontological perspective of value co-creation, destination
branding can be regarded as a mutual and ongoing process among a
number of actors. Visitor consumption and value creation is often mod-
elled as a chronological process, originating from value chain thinking.
Destinations as gadgets 101
The value chain model (Porter, 1985) stems from the industrial era, model-
ling production systems, through which raw materials are refined into pal-
pable consumer goods. Within this model, services are seen as after-sales
add-ons (residuals) to the material offering. A similar ranking principle is
perceivable in the augmented services model (Normann, 1984) and several
destination systems models (Buhalis, 2000), differentiating between core,
peripheral and supporting providers or services. Based on this classifica-
tion, various actors on a destination (retailers, leisure associations or enter-
tainers) are deemed ancillary (but not vital) to the tourism consumption
process.
In an influential article of the Journal of Marketing, Vargo and Lusch
(2004) argue for a paradigm shift in marketing theory, promoting a
service-centred model of exchange. Their proposition is inspired by the
value constellation model (Norman & Ramirez, 1994), regarding value
creation as a simultaneous dialogue between provider(s) and consumer.
This paradigm shift implies that value emerges during the interaction itself,
as it is co-created together with the customer. The reassessment of custom-
ers as being co-producers and active participants in value creation proc-
esses make the value chain logic outdated (in which there is a focus on
resources that are refined into a material output). Rather, the focus shifts
to understand resources (e.g. knowledge and skills of both customers and
providers) that produce immaterial effects and values (for both customers
and providers). This perspective has two consequences for tourism destina-
tions. First, it makes the previous typology of core and peripheral services
obsolete, as any provider may contribute to the tourist’s experience of the
destination – during the visit to a flagship attraction or while sitting in the
airport transfer taxi. Second, the material offering becomes a device or an
add-on: ‘Goods are transmitters of operant resources (embedded know-
ledge); they are intermediate products that are used by other operant
resources (customers) as appliances in value-creation processes’ (Vargo &
Lusch, 2004, p. 12, our emphasis). Going along this logic, entire destina-
tions may be regarded as ‘appliances’ in the tourist’s value creation
process. But what exactly is the value defined and sought by visitors and
how does it emerge? In order to capture these processes, it is necessary to
delve deeper into the character of contemporary tourism consumption.
Postmodern consumption theory suggests that leisure and tourism (similar
to entertainment, design and fashion) are a part of the popular cultural
matrix, dominated by the economy of icons (Sternberg, 1999). Products
are mere symbols whose meaning is created by the consumers (Firat &
Shultz, 1997), turning destinations and tourism products into fashion
accessories enhancing or expressing consumer identities. However, follow-
ing Vargo and Lush’s argumentation on interactive value creation above,
this identity production must be reciprocal. Consequently, tourists not only
build their own self-images, but may also contribute to the image forma-
tion of service providers (i.e. a destination and its actors).
Methodology
This study is a part of a larger project focusing on innovative destination
management networks emerging around the Voss Extreme Sport Festival,
Extremsportsveko. This chapter concentrates on the following questions:
How are young consumer identities formed and influenced by the destina-
tion products of Voss? How are local products reinterpreted, combined
and aligned with contemporary consumer culture? How is a sportive desti-
nation identity enhanced in destination actor–tourist interactions? To illu-
minate these issues, multi-method research design was chosen. This
included participant observations during the 2006 festival, resulting in field
notes from the entire week, photographs and interviews with spectators
and various stakeholders. Between June and September 2006, the follow-
ing actors were interviewed: the festival general manager, eight disciplinary
coordinators, the concert organiser, the editor of Today’s Video as well as
the coordinator of festival volunteers.
Furthermore, secondary material from different media (NRK, the public
TV channel), newspapers like Hordaland and Bergens Tidende, the Fri Flyt
magazine, and festival and community websites) was collected, and a
content analysis of Today’s Video was performed. In this chapter, these
data sources are mainly quoted as empirical illustrations in order to
support the conceptual proposition of co-created destination identity. In
the remainder, the empirical case and findings are presented, including a
brief portrait of Destination Voss. Consequently, actors that play a vital
role in repositioning Voss as an extreme destination are presented. These
parts of the chapter also highlight symbiotic relationships between tourists
and local entrepreneurs, pointing at the mutual construction of a young
and sportive identity.
Voss in a nutshell
Voss (14,000 inhabitants) is located ten miles east of Bergen, in a back
country constituted of deep valleys, highlands and mountains rising to
1,600 metres above sea level. Voss has been a tourism destination for over
200 years, claiming to offer a ‘marvellous cultural and scenic mixture [. . .]
for tourists who seek experiences that are out of the ordinary’ (Visit Voss,
2006). Like most of the inner country, Voss is struggling with depopula-
tion and bleak community budgets, but is currently undergoing an eco-
nomic transition and gradually becoming a star of the Norwegian
experience economy, hosting international cultural and sport events, pro-
ducing designer clothes and boasting local patriotism that has earned the
epithet ‘an Un-Norwegian piece of Norway’ (DnB NorBank customer
magazine 2006).
Today, Voss is the main hub in the internationally promoted ‘Norway
in a Nutshell’ tour, frequented by tourists on organised trips (including
cruise ship passengers to Bergen, Hardanger or Sogn fjords). Altogether
217,000 overnight stays were registered in 2006, of which 44 per cent
were international guests. The local DMO (Visit Voss, owned and oper-
ated by the municipality) produces a destination brand imagery featuring
Voss as pastoral and picturesque, and thereby reinventing the historical
grand tourist gaze in its communication material.
In Norway, Voss has a strong market position both as a summer and a
winter destination, with nature based and extreme sports as part of its
image. Because of favourable snow conditions in the area, Voss is a
popular winter destination, offering a range of skiing activities from
November to May. The town has earned a matchless status in Norwegian
sports history, giving Norway the most winter sports medal winners
throughout the times. Local athletes have been representing the country in
every Winter Olympic Games since 1948 and won 18 Olympic medals (in
Nordic racing, free style, alpine, ski flying and biathlon). The Voss region
also provides excellent conditions for white-water rafting, aerial sports,
rock climbing and mountain hiking, resulting in active local sports clubs in
over ten disciplines and an increasing density of outdoor sport outfitters.
This adventure cluster has taken the lead in a number of developments, of
which the best known is Extremsportsveko (Extreme Sports Festival)
organised every June since 1998. In 2002, the area was presented as the
‘Parachute Valley’ (Cater & Mykletun, 2003), and Voss has been referred
to as the ‘unofficial Adventure Capital of Norway’ in various contexts. For
example, the latest stamp series issued by the Norwegian Post (launched in
January 2007), features six tourist destinations of Norway. Here, Voss is
represented by two skydivers, also emphasising the establishing status of
Voss as an extreme sport destination.
Apart from the adventure profile, Voss also boasts rich culinary tradi-
tions, which led to the development of Vossamenyen (the Voss Menu),
promoting a wider range of local (small-scale) food products for both
domestic and tourism consumption. Yet, Smalahove (salted, smoked, dried
and cooked sheep’s head) remains Voss’ iconic dish, which has received
much attention through exposure on both Extremsportsveko and its own
festival, Smalahovesleppet (the release of the sheep heads) in October.
Recent local beverage productions – a specially brewed sweet and thick
porter based on the home-brewed Vossa ale, and a collector’s aquavit
based on traditional recipes – complement the acquired taste of Smalahove.
However, the internationally best-known beverage promoting the region is
Voss of Norway spring water sold in exclusive bottles designed by Calvin
Klein.
Three groups of actors are believed to play an important role in creating
a parallel young and sportive identity for Voss: the extreme sports festival
and its stakeholders, the retired freestyle skier and local entrepreneur Kari
Traa and Voss of Norway. These are presented below.
The ideologist of cool and proper adventure: Extremsportsveko
Extremsportsveko is a niche event targeted at a young audience, packaging
adventure sports and ‘celebrating playfulness’ with spectator shows and
music concerts. Since its establishment in 1998 as a non-profit foundation
by four local sports clubs in Voss, Extremsportsveko has developed from
being a small, informal meeting for extreme sportsmen into a commercially
viable festival product, attracting 20,000 visitors (sportsmen, spectators
and volunteers) in 2007. The festival is outstanding in the world, present-
ing professional championships in 16 extreme disciplines. Officially
acclaimed competitions (Norwegian, European and World Cup in some
disciplines) and national television broadcasting may indicate that these (in
some instances underground, discriminated or prohibited sporting activ-
ities) are now legitimised and formalised through the festival.
The festival is ‘more than just about extreme sports competitions. It’s
about music, playfulness and the amazing nature of Western Norway’
claims the foundation, whose additional goal is to promote Voss as an
adventure destination. This is achieved through an unparalleled, hybrid
concept combining spectator sports, adventure sports as well as a music
festival. Spectators may follow various competitions and shows in the
daytime and visit the evening festivities. They may also buy an all-inclusive
‘Try-It! Package’ (a facilitated sampling ten extreme sports, including a
sheep head meal, to combine extreme sports and extreme food adventures.
While daytime venues are free and scattered around ‘natural’ spectator
areas (lakeside, cliff towers, small rivers) in a 60-kilometre diameter, the
organisers charge high fees for the festival pass. This covers entry to the
evening programme (located in Voss centre), including the showing of
Today’s Video (an edited version of actual highlights, accompanied with
free techo-music downloads), medal ceremonies and live concerts. Today’s
Video is indeed a merchandise of ‘thrill’: an audiovisual product that has
been used since 1998 to summarize, enhance and promote adventure
experiences to the spectators of the festival. These video highlights (about
20 minutes each) are shown in the festival tent every evening, and a compi-
lation of the entire week’s Today’s Video can be bought at the end of
Extremsportsveko.
A narrative analysis of Today’s Video as well as interviews with the fes-
tival general confirmed a classic formation ideology (‘a sound soul in a
sound body’) well hidden behind the eccentrically depicted playful activ-
ities. Targeted at youngsters and serious sportsmen, the symbolic portfolio
of Extremsportsveko unites hedonism (feel good, have fun) with respons-
ibility and discipline (sobriety, healthy living, respecting nature). At first
glance, Today’s Video is dominated by a light-hearted and playful tone.
There are several close-ups featuring athletes or spectators smiling and
flirting with the camera, screaming ‘yeah’, giving thumbs-ups or ‘high five’
to appreciate each other’s performance. Fun is manifested in staged gags,
such as a kayaker’s video ballad in Bollywood style, or the presentation of
an unofficial discipline (Chinese heather and bush downhill), combining
snowboarding on grass and naked waterfall bathing. Furthermore, inter-
mezzo scenes in Today’s Video also include voyeuristic glancing of young
female visitors (camera close-ups into cleavage or elevator gazes on their
legs), establishing the dominant gaze as being that of the ‘mook’ (Rush-
koff, 2001), denoting the perpetual adolescent, characterised by infantile,
boorish and sexist behaviour. Evening concerts and Today’s Video falls in
the taste of a younger age group, featuring underground soundscapes (mix
of techno, dance, rap, funk, reggae, heavy rock). A common denominator
is a high pulse or a seductive beat underscoring the adrenaline rush in the
visual material. The title theme features a visual countdown from 100 to
zero accompanied by percussion solo and a monstrous voice whispering
‘touch the devil inside’ – connoting rage rock artists. Extreme sensory
impressions of edgework and borderlining are aptly captured in most of
the selected lyrics. These may include text strings related to craziness (‘you
make me crazy’, ‘I can’t go fast enough’, ‘out of control’), encouragement
(‘let’s get it started’, ‘get on track before we begin’) and delirious experi-
ences (‘flashlights, nightmares, explosions’ or ‘I lost myself’) and many
more.
However, border seeking, politically incorrect and sexist elements are
being weighed up by a covert educational agenda of ‘proper adventure’,
pointing at the benefits of an active and respectful lifestyle: ‘Extremsports-
veko is for serious sportsmen, not for rastahippies smoking joints. . . . we
try to avoid attracting a Roskilde festival clientele, who are drunk for a
whole week’ (interview with festival manager). Sobriety and healthy living
was promoted on various occasions. Before the showing of the video high-
lights, a sober driving campaign (Sei ifrå) was put on view every night. Fes-
tival catering was provided by Vossamenyen, offering only local meat
products, fruit, water and light beer brewed on water from the nearby
glacier. Coca-Cola was shining with its absence, thanks to the festival man-
agement’s no-frills philosophy. This also implied limited sponsor
exposition and sponsored ads, and total absence of giveaways, banners or
merchandise scattered around the destination. Several members of the
organising committee referred to other, commercial sports events and festi-
vals as ‘tasteless’ or as ‘in contradiction with environmental respectfulness’.
In addition, even social responsibility was promoted, through the presence
of Amnesty International desk and activists.
One of the reasons for the success of the extreme sports festival lies in
its essence as a cultural hybrid. It is once folksy and underground, allowing
mingling among generations, but also appealing to a young urban under-
ground musical taste. It is also both eccentric and inclusive: targeted at the
perpetual (or wannabe) younger adults, but also invite local inhabitants,
children and seniors to participate. One day is reserved for seniors and
another for children, offering specialised programmes. Finally, it is both
respectful and politically incorrect, blending elements of adolescent play-
fulness and serious moral issues. This fragmentation and the dual ideology
of hedonism and discipline conveyed the impression that Extremsports-
veko is not a commercial product. Nevertheless, the festival only differs
from mainstream commercial products in its narrative genre (satire) and
communication techniques. Overtly and covertly it promotes a stream of
opportunities for additional purchase (selected outdoor equipment, gar-
ments, local food providers, helicopter shuttles, etc.), as demonstrated next.
The merchants of adventure: BULA, Kari Traa and Voss of

Norway
Probably the best-known Olympic medal winner of Voss is freestyle skier
Kari Traa, who became an icon for a whole generation of girls in the
beginning of the new millennium, and also the most popular sport star in
Norwegian mass media. For years she was sponsored by the BULA sport
and leisure clothing company, and also started her own sport outfit collec-
tion that was co-branded with BULA. After retiring from competition in
2006, she launched her own sport and leisure garment brand KARI TRAA,
and also opened her own KARI TRAA Concept Store at Voss, selling
locally designed outfits. Her most famous recent product is specially styled
women’s underwear, which she has frankly marketed in person. BULA is
Fijian for ‘hello, goodbye, peace and cheers’, and the brand philosophy
behind Kari Traa’s clothes is ‘living life well’. The two brands have
common features and were sold together in the BULA shop in Voss for
several years. By wearing BULA or KARI TRAA headbands, jumpers or
anoraks, customers are conveyed the Fijian way of life ‘carefree outdoor
existence’, as well as Kari Traa’s legendary story – a school example of
symbolic consumption and co-branding. This story is hardly unique. Over
the last 15 years, skydiving, mountain climbing and rafting have evolved
into a lucrative area of leisure sport and retailing, partly because of charac-
ter associations related to them (risk tolerance, thrill, tenacity, courage,
etc.). Buying recreational activities and garments designed by former sport
celebrities may mark social status and position or highlight an individual’s
belonging to a subculture (Green & Chalip, 1998), in this case, the casual
adventurers’ community.
BULA and Kari Traa are sponsoring the extreme sports festival and
BULA has produced specially designed festival T-shirts and jumpers (at the
price of C25–35), which were worn by practically each visitor during the
whole week in 2006. A remarkable marketing trick was played in 2004
when the BULA and the extreme sport festival announcements were
painted on the cows of the farmer Ivar Løne, who is the sole industrial
producer of Smalahove. This triggered a great national debate between
organisations protecting animals on one side, and the farmer and the
BULA on the other, adding great visibility to the extreme sport festival as
well as to Voss and the BULA brand. Moreover, extreme sport festival
accepted BULA to announce their brand by setting up giant letters reading
‘BULAWOOD’ on the downhill biking slopes above the town and later on,
inscribed as black letters on a snowy mountain face looking down on to
the town.
Kari Traa is a one-woman PR factory for Voss’ sportive image. Even
after her retirement, she keeps on appearing in national and international
media because of her engagement in a number of goodwill initiatives (i.e.
organising and sponsoring a talent camp for young female freestyle skiers).
She was also in charge of designing and preparing the steep downhill free-
style slopes of the Voss 07 Freestyle World Cup, and she recently got a
major ski lift named after her. Owing to the recognition she has gained in
winter sports games over the last 16 years, the local community is obvi-
ously proud of Kari Traa’s incessant engagement in Voss and her way of
making the place recognised worldwide. Although she has been seen on
provocative magazine photos wearing close to nothing, she is also known
for paying respect to some central Voss icons like sheep-head meals and
speaking in the local dialect. The BULA brand and Kari Traa as a ‘per-
sonal concept’ fits well together with the ambience of Voss as an extreme
destination, especially in their applauding of untamed freedom and the
hybrid combination of the unexpected and unconventional on one side,
and seriousness on the other.
The Voss Artesian Water is an innovative development of two Norwe-
gian entrepreneurs, Ole Sandberg and Christopher Harlem, who joined
forces with creative director Neil Kraft at Calvin Kline to design an ultra
premium (luxury) water brand. The idea was to turn an ordinary commod-
ity (spring water) into a fashion accessory, by designing a fragrance-like
transparent bottle, connoting purity, style and sophistication. After the
first year of launch, Voss of Norway sold about $2.1 million of bottled
spring water. Voss Water is advertised as ‘coming from the purest water
sources found on the planet’, a brand essence (together with the visual
appeal) has invaded the North American market, and apparently caught
the attention of several Hollywood stars. The company website (www.
vosswater.com) regularly features a gossip column, describing when and
how international celebrities (Madonna, Britney Spears, George Clooney,
Scarlett Johansson) were spotted drinking Voss Water on public occasions.
The celebrity PR resulted in a turnover above $15 million in 2004, plant-
ing Voss Water solidly on the global beverage market (E24, 2007). Today
it constitutes the biggest Norwegian export article to the US, measured in
tons, and it can even be found at the Annual Miami South Beach Wine and
Food Festival as well as on special ‘Water Menus’ on US fine dining
restaurants.
Each sold bottle is a free product placement for its alleged place of
origin (Voss), lending the water’s brand image of purity and style to Voss
as a destination brand. It is worth mentioning that not only is Voss Water
a recent invention dating from 2000, but it is not even tapped in Voss but
in the neighbouring community of Iveland. However, authenticity is no
longer an excluding criteria for the postmodern consumer, who happily
blends reality, fiction and celebrity gossip just to personalise a popular cul-
tural narrative. For instance, there is a great appeal in consuming the same
Voss Water that Madonna herself is drinking. Similarly to the symbolic
power of BULA clothes, Voss Water transfers a number of meaning frag-
ments to its drinker: fashionability and style (owing to cool design and the
celebrity stories), healthy living (drinking water as good for general well-
ness), purity and exclusivity (drinking from the cleanest sources on Earth)
and youthfulness (connotation of water as a source of life).

Destination brands are unmanageable along corporate branding principles
(Blichfeldt, 2005), because destination stakeholders and actors operate by
different economic goals, target groups and marketing interests. Further-
more, there may be problems related to loyalty, identification and simulta-
neous multiple memberships (actors are a part of several organisational
contexts) and, most of all, lack of ownership. Voss is no different in this
regard, and its touristic identity is oligophrenic and contrasted: being con-
templative and pastoral as well as energetic and cosmopolitan at once. It
can be argued that this fragmentation and dialectic is a part of every desti-
nation drawing different target groups, adding to the diversity and dyna-
mism of place branding. A centrally steered place brand with streamlined
norms and values may thus be both unachievable and undesirable.
Hence, it is about time to shift focus in destination branding research.
Rather than depicting the controversial interests among destination actors as
an obstacle for an ideally functioning DMO, more attention should be paid
to grass-root initiatives, organic marketing processes and branding networks
operating parallel with the official tourist organisation. These networks must
also consider tourists as an important source of innovation, as they are
forming their identities in symbiosis with the destination. Identity arises from
the interactions between destination visitors and destination products,
during which each looks to the other to establish an own self. Looking at
mediated adventures and sporty lifestyle narratives, promoted by three
actors (Extremsportsveko, BULA and Kari Traa, Voss Water), Voss is about
to reposition itself and develop a relationship with its younger visitors. A
festival or an outdoor garment producer aiming to be regarded as a platform
for cool communitas, good vibrations as well as proper sportsmanship, turns
to underground popular culture to get some inspirational alternative to
mainstream events. A commodity retailer joins forces with the fashion and
film industries in order to turn water into an aesthetic luxury item.
On the other side, young people, searching for their own identity aptly
termed as Letande Ludvig (Searching Ludvig) in Norwegian, are looking for
unique, fetishised ‘gadgets’ on the experience market. These ‘accessories’
may either differ from streamlined franchise concepts (e.g. BULA) or
endorsed by celebrity idols because of their distinctiveness (Voss of Norway).
Some of these actors use inconspicuous commodification techniques, while
others adhere to an overt commercial practice – but altogether they draw on
each other to co-create a sportive young identity for Voss. This case is also a
proof of tourist destinations becoming an integrated part of the entertain-
ment industry, where product development and innovation is steered by life-
style trends rather than classic tourist discourses (binary division between
ordinary/non-ordinary, quest for the Other, authenticity). From a postmod-
ern consumption perspective, destinations are hyper-real playgrounds where
identities are constructed with both popular cultural and authentically staged
accessories. By reassessing destinations as ordinary lifestyle gadgets (means)
instead of non-ordinary travel goals (ends), the way may be paved to differ-
entiated marketing and product development in rural destinations.
References
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building strong brands. New York: The Free Press.
Anholt, S. (2004). Nation brands and the value of provenance. In N. Morgan, A.
Pritchard & R. Pride (Eds.), Destination branding: Creating the unique destina-
tion proposition (pp. 26–39). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Bell, D. & Valentine, G. (1997). Consuming geographies: We are where we eat.
London: Routledge.
Blichfeldt, B. S. (2005). Unmanageable place brands? Place Branding, 1(4):
388–401.
Management, 21(1), 97–116.
Cater, C. & Mykletun, R. J. (2003). Selling the extreme: Marketing adventure
sports destinations in New Zealand and Norway. Paper presented at the ‘Taking
tourism to its limits’ conference at Waikato University, New Zealand, 8–11
December.
Csaba, F. F. (2005). The limits of corporate branding. In M. Schultz, Y. M.
Antorini & F. F. Csaba (Eds.), Corporate branding: Purpose, people, process
(pp. 127–149). København: Copenhagen Business School Press.
E24. (2007). Norsk flaskevann får kjendishjelp. Retrieved February 28, 2007,
from: http://e24.no/arkiv/article832555.ece.
Extreme Sports Week (2006). Retrieved August 8, 2007, from: http://www.
ekstremsportveko.com/.
Firat, A. F. & Schultz II, C. J. (1997). From segmentation to fragmentation. Euro-
pean Journal of Marketing, 31(3/4), 183–207.
Frochot, I. (2003). An analysis of regional positioning and its associated food
images in French regional tourism brochures. Journal of Travel and Tourism
Marketing, 14(3/4), 77–96.
Green, B. C. & Chalip, L. (1998). Sport tourism as a celebration of subculture: The
ethnography of a women’s football tournament. Annals of Tourism Research,
25(2), 275–291.
Gyimóthy, S. (2005). Nostalgiascapes: The renaissance of Danish countryside inns.
In T. O’Dell & P. Billing (Eds.), Experiencescapes: Tourism, culture and
economy (pp. 112–124). København: Copenhagen Business School Press.
Hall, C. M. & Mitchell, R. (2002). The tourist terroir of New Zealand wine: The
importance of region in the wine tourism experience. In A. Montanari (Ed.),
Food and environment: The geography of taste (pp. 69–91). Rome: Società
Geografica Italiana, Home of Geography Publication Series II.
Jensen, O. B. & Richardson, T. (2003). Making European space. London:
Routledge.
May, J. (1996). A little taste of something more exotic: The imaginative geogra-
phies of everyday life. Geography, 81(1), 57–64.
Miele, M. & Murdoch, J. (2002). The practical aesthetics of traditional cuisines:
Slow food in Tuscany. Sociologica Ruralis, 42(4), 312–328.
Normann, R. (1984). Service management: Strategy and leadership in service busi-
nesses. Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
Normann, R. & Ramirez, R. (1994). Designing interactive strategy: From value
chain to value constellation. Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
Porter, M. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior per-
formance. New York: The Free Press.
Rushkoff, D. (2001). The pursuit of cool. Sportswear International, 12.
Scarpato, R. & Daniele, R. (2003). New global cuisine: Tourism, authenticity and
sense of place in postmodern gastronomy. In M. Hall, L. Sharples, R. Mitchell,
N. Macionis & B. Cambourne (Eds.), Food tourism around the world: Develop-
ment, management and markets (pp. 296–313). Amsterdam: Butterworth Heine-
mann.
Schultz, M., Antorini, Y. M. & Csaba, F. F. (Eds.). (2006). Corporate branding:
Purpose, people, process. København: Copenhagen Business School Press.
Sternberg, E. (1999). The economy of icons: How business manufactures meaning.
Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Tasci, A. D. A. & Kozak, M. (2006). Destination brands vs destination images: Do
we know what we mean? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12(4), 299–317.
Telfer, D. J. & Hashimoto, A. (2003). Food tourism in the Niagara region: The
development of a nouvelle cuisine. In M. Hall, L. Sharples, R. Mitchell, N.
Macionis & B. Cambourne (Eds.), Food tourism around the world: Develop-
ment, management and markets (pp. 158–177). Amsterdam: Butterworth Heine-
mann.
Therkelsen, A. (2003). Imagining places. Image formation of tourists and its con-
sequences for destination promotion. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism, 3(2): 134–151.
Vargo, S. L. & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for market-
ing. Journal of Marketing, 68(January), 1–17.
Visit Voss. (2006). Visit Voss Turistinformasjon. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from:
http://www.visitvoss.no.
Welsch, W. (1996). Aestheticisation processes: Phenomena, distinctions, prospects.
Theory, Culture and Society, 13(1), 1–24.
Part III
Destination networks
9 Networking approaches for
sustainable destination
management
Francesco Polese and Antonio Minguzzi
Introduction
Modern society, recent trends and contemporary lifestyles show a general
increase in tourist flows and the growing importance of the tourism indus-
try in many countries throughout the world. Despite this phenomenon,
tourism has still proven to be a difficult issue for tourism enterprises to
deal with. It almost seems as if the tourism industry is not fully capable of
valorising international tourism and its escalating figures, especially the
ever-increasing number of people travelling to and from new emerging
markets such as East Asia. This may be due to the tourist’s profile, which
has shown constant changes in the new millennium and to global tourism
products, which tend to incorporate a wide variety of goods and services
difficultly managed by single actors. Tourists, in fact, usually tend to amass
each component offered within tourism in their overall perception rather
than rating singular factors since their needs are perceived as a whole. This
attitude does not adequately reflect the tourism production system, which
is composed of many different actors affecting the singular factors men-
tioned above. This is the main reason that the global tourism product may
be a fashionable and interesting issue when considering demand. It is,
however, much harder to deal with taking supply into account as it stimu-
lates the aggregation and collaboration of many actors in specific territo-
rial areas. Hence tourism destination management, enabling systemic
governance of territorial areas, is becoming the only means of territorial
competitiveness for local stakeholders. Even though this concept is easily
comprehensible in theory, it is very hard to carry out since it concerns
effective cooperation between private and public actors in the tourism
industry.
Moreover, the application of theoretical models to the tourism industry
emphasises how suppliers tend to be highly heterogeneous in terms of tech-
nology, clients and functions, and how they are kept together only by their
common goal of satisfying a particular type of demand connected to the
tourism experience of single actors. Therefore, multidimensional models
become unsuitable for describing the tourism phenomenon considered as a
114 F. Polese and A. Minguzzi
whole. These considerations explain the difficulties in defining specific
managerial trends and common policies in the tourism industry, leading us
to our discussion and analysis of sustainable tourism.
Emerging tourism perspectives

The aforementioned tourism phenomenon involves a wide variety of firms
and service companies, among which the most reactive and competitive are
excelling and benefiting from growing tourism flows. Companies capable
of understanding and, hence, interiorising the needs of the tourism indus-
try pursue competitive behaviours capable of smoothening relationships on
a local basis and thus strengthening the territory’s ability to offer a solid
global tourism product.
This aggregating impulse is also due to another emerging need high-
lighted by modern society and by modern tourists – ecological and envir-
onmental friendly behaviour. Environmental heritage and natural beauties
protection have taken on a growing importance in the demand for tourism
services (Font, 2000) encouraging prospects for ecotourism, whose impor-
tance was brought to light by the UN’s designation of 2002 as the ‘Inter-
national Year of Ecotourism’ (Maclaren, 2002).
Thus, ecological issues have become a part of a tourist’s cultural prior-
ities and of business interests in the industry. Yet we must ask ourselves if
nature and tourism in fact get along in harmonious mutual development.
Tourism flows, in fact, may bring congestion, overuse and abuse of scarce
local resources such as traffic, noise, pollution and many other environ-
mental effects that are often difficult to quantify, but indeed contrast with
ecological issues.
In a way, tourists bring about benefits due to the related economic reve-
nues of their travel and yet instigate negative effects both socially and eco-
logically at the same time. This is the principal motivation behind the
recent conception of a new strategic behaviour, which balances economi-
cal, social and ecological issues all while managing sensible territorial
development and competitiveness. We are referring to the concept of sus-
tainable development, which has stimulated the arousal of a ‘multidimen-
sional development’, capable of integrating social equity, economic
efficiency and ecosystem integrity within territorial development. The
underlying assumption is that to attain economic long-term development,
territorial policies, strategies and actions should take into serious account
all three aspects of tourism development – social, economic and ecological
– in order to embark upon a promising evolutionary path.
Therefore, sustainable destination management can be referred to in
many ways (as a cultural attitude, managerial tool or strategic behaviour),
but is strictly related to multidimensional development through the equi-
librium between issues that occasionally contrast such as the environment,
social needs and economic growth. Sustainable destination management is
Networking approaches 115
about territorial valorisation, the correct use of local resources and respect
for others’ expectations.
Tourism destination management

A large number and many different types of socio-economic agents can be
identified in territories throughout the world. For this reason the harmoni-
sation process requires relational approaches that seek the balance between
different needs. Nevertheless, territories, no less than firms, strongly
compete to attract resources such as foreign investments, tourism flows,
local consensus, etc., and concern themselves with a correct and sensible
use of available local resources. A territory’s ability to develop a com
petitive evolutionary path, in fact, passes through the valorisation of its
main capabilities, looking for sustainable development and long-term
perspectives.
Building upon Porter’s Competitive Diamond (1990), Ritchie and
Crouch (2003) created a systemic model for destination competitiveness
within the tourism industry. Porter’s Diamond includes four key elements
– factor conditions, demand conditions, related support sectors and strat-
egy, structure and rivalry among firms. A fifth component was added,
referred to as destination, policy, planning and development, for the
growing importance that members of the tourism industry are placing on
carefully chosen strategic alliances, both at the local and regional levels.
In this scenario, local governments should employ destination manage-
ment to create competitive advantages for territorial areas that are well
rooted in local strengths and unique capabilities. In other words, in order
to promote territorial competitiveness, local governments should define
strategies that are both coherent and compatible with territorial character-
istics in terms of capabilities, cultural and historical heritage and natural
and landscape beauties; thus projecting a strong personality, demonstrat-
ing unique capacities and suggesting new marketing trends based upon
internal and external relationships (Gronroos, 1990). On the down side,
territorial governance is often attributed to several levels of decision
makers, hence making it difficult to harmonise strategic behaviour for ter-
ritorial competitiveness (Lovelock & Boyd, 2006; Minguzzi, 2006).
Destination management, thus, should look to balance interests among
local stakeholders, namely municipalities, local communities, industries,
service firms, tourism enterprises, NGOs, etc., and in the tourism phenom-
enon this has been addressed as tourism sustainable destination manage-
ment (Muhanna, 2006). This type of destination management policy is far
from becoming a natural developing attitude and has to be fervently
pursued with effort on behalf of local actors. This may also be due to
specific conflicts due to different interests that may arise throughout a
territory, which, however, gradually bring about proper development
initiatives to increase territorial competitiveness with active participation.
The potential contribution of network theory for collaborative theory may
be critically evaluated in order to show how conflicts or effective destina-
tion management may arise within tourism areas (Dredge, 2006).
Hence, new forms of competition between tourism enterprises and
tourism areas throughout the world have encouraged firms and territories
to design and manage rich and diversified global tourism products (Smith,
1994) capable of satisfying the modern tourist’s needs flanked alongside
local potential and resources. This strategic option, on a local basis, allows
destination management to project a systemic image attracting tourism
flows associated with the particular attractions unique to the local area
and, thus, achieving effective destination branding. Empirical evidence
demonstrates that competitive tourist attractions may be based on portray-
ing a specific image to the potential market that, combined with related
management action, may inevitably enhance destination competitiveness
(Blain, Levy & Ritchie, 2005; Hu & Wall 2005). Matching territorial
potential and external messages plays an important role in capturing the
attention of the right target market; those tourists who are really interested
in the offered product. There are cases in which both the scarce valorisa-
tion of potential and the wrong outgoing message have represented a
major cause of insufficient competitiveness in areas that could most likely
become interesting tourist attractions (McKercher & Ho, 2006).
In light of this cultural approach to territorial management, local actors
should conduct systemic behaviour and powerful development actions val-
orising local distinctive capabilities (Leiper, 1990; Mill & Morrison 1985).
This is not an easy task, since in specific territorial areas there are many
different actors as well as diversified needs, making it a real challenge to
integrate systemic policy and action due to different expectations charac-
terising local actors, difficultly integrated into a standard path of develop-
ment (Silva & McDill, 2004). However, we believe that the benefits
overcome the difficulties, hence our pursuit in tracing out the details of this
virtuous behaviour in our quest for a type of sensible destination manage-
ment capable of associating different local interests, promoting an
empowered strategic approach based on a many to many logic (Gummes-
son, 2006).
Finding the balance between differentiated needs and expectations
relates to just territorial resource management and valorisation (Barney,
1991; Grant, 1991; Penrose, 1959; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). The viable
system approach (Barile, 2008; Golinelli, Pastore, Gatti, Massaroni &
Vagnani, 2002; Golinelli, 2005, 2009) focuses on a government actor who
plays a key role in developing systemic dynamics, highlighting the impor-
tance of relationships between the actors involved. Indeed, according to
this approach, territorial components are involved in systemic dynamics
only when governed by a leading agent who can facilitate value creation
processes for territorial entities. Local agents are therefore encouraged to
make the resources they possess available, which, in turn, stimulate territo-
rial competitive behaviour. It is like a virtuous cycle, centred on a local
actor representing local dynamics, based on the positive cultural attitude
promoted by a local government actor in perceiving and directing context
evolution.
But who’s in charge of territorial governance, and most of all, who leads
local development in smoothening out different trajectories of territorial
actors in order to aggregate local development within systemic develop-
ment? Are municipalities, public entities, NGOs and, sometimes, private
actors capable of destination management? We believe that the network
theory may help to solve this issue.
Destination management and networks

Several authors have noted how changes in competitive behaviour have
switched the focus of strategic analysis from the Porter value chain of a
single firm to value creation systems involving many actors. This change of
focus stresses the relevance in the pursuit of strategic goals and relations
established between agents participating in the production and consump-
tion system (Normann & Ramirez, 1994; Parolini, 1999). Within these
value creation systems, networks are certainly relevant in understanding
tourism production systems. This is due to the fragmentation present
within the industry, and the fact that products are complex and systemic,
and to the numerous and differentiated actors participating in the value
creation process.
Many authors have devoted their research to networks, following socio-
economic trends that show how this form of organisation is becoming
increasingly frequent in society, especially in response to globalisation.
Some have defined a network as an organisational model that allows a
more effective response to actual market conditions dominated by demand
uncertainty (and more generally by environmental uncertainty), resource
specificity, task complexity and frequent transactions. Lorenzoni (1992),
as many others (Burt, 1983; Hakansson, 1987; Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1994),
asserts that networks help to manage environmental complexity. Another
perspective has focused on the reciprocal benefits of sharing and valorising
resources within networks and supply chain systems arguing that network
interconnections are designed according to a reciprocal relationship
between resource owners and resource users (Johanson & Mattson, 1987).
This brings us to sustainable tourism networks. When dealing with
tourism networks, scientific research seems to focus on two major issues.
The first is concerned with the advantages of unified marketing strategies
within territorial areas (Buhalis, 2000; Murphy, Pritchard & Smith, 2000).
The second is interested in the managerial aspects of tourist destinations
intended as strategic and competitive subjects, focusing, in particular, on
the operating aspects of tourism networks or districts (Flagestad & Hope,
2001). In this chapter, we will focus on the managerial aspects, as our
intent is to enrich tourism analysis through a different cultural approach,
such as the one originated by the network analysis (Bramwell & Lane,
2005).
It seems that, in particular areas of the world, territorial governance is a
key development factor. More specifically, networks of local entities with a
guiding centre seem to provide a powerful way of guaranteeing systemic
and harmonious development. However, without a strong government,
network dynamics lacks direction and reveals non-homogeneous strategies.
Therefore, in order to be competitive, sustainable tourism networks require
a guiding centre with a representative core that acts on its behalf, for both
public and private actors capable of government action and systemic
dynamics.
Empirical evidence
So far we have underlined how networks may be considered powerful
organisational forms capable of promoting territorial governance. All the
same, these aggregations may take on very different forms depending on
the nature and history of the relational patterns between nodes. One of
these forms can be identified as territorial parks and is significant in that it
makes a strong effort to aggregate local entities towards a shared develop-
ment path and purpose. Territorial parks (national or regional) are in fact
a kind of network based on local government actions promoting the valor-
isation of resources. Thus, these parks may be thought of as networks of
territorial entities aimed at satisfying the needs of many stakeholders and
promoting local development (Hawkins, 2004). Our analysis of territorial
parks is based on the comparison between two parks, both in Campania
Region (Italy), the Cilento National Park and the Matese Regional Park,
hereafter analytically described within their relative data of interest. Fol-
lowing a methodological approach to our research, first we collected and
analysed data from secondary sources. Second, after verifying the physical
and quantitative differences existing between the two parks, we defined a
collecting plan in order to approach our primary sources. More specifi-
cally, we decided to investigate territorial subjects through personal inter-
view techniques using questionnaires with open answers. Among the
interviewees were representatives of local enterprises and managers and
directors of these territorial parks.
Cilento National Park has a surface area of about 178,172 hectares and
a population density of approximately 80 units per square kilometre. Its
main tourist attractions are the archaeological sites on the Alburni Moun-
tains and Istmica road and the many natural resources in the area. The
economic analysis of the park area shows the presence of 26,030 busi-
nesses, the majority in agricultural (37.6 per cent) or trading (26 per cent)
industries. The tourism industry accounts for 6 per cent of the total
number of businesses (about 1,500).
The Cilento National Park is included in the UNESCO World Heritage
List. The park, with its 78 municipalities, represents a very vast and differ-
entiated territory, including areas with low demographic density and low
tourism flows – such as the internal mountain towns of Roccadaspide or
Stio (beautiful sites for ecological tourism) – and coastal areas with a
greater population density and stronger tourism flows.
On the other hand, Matese Regional Park has a surface area of about
65,500 hectares, and a population density of approximately 81 units per
square kilometre. The park’s principal tourist attractions include its lakes
and waterfalls, the Pietraroja paleontological site, its many castles, several
fortified little towns and a number of natural resources, such as the WWF
Oasis of Le Mortine. There are approximately 2,702 businesses with a
majority of agricultural and typical products. The tourism industry is not a
significant component of its economy, even though tourism is a priority of
the park governance. Typical local products include olive oil, different
types of cheese, ham and lamb meat.
The Matese Regional Park is also a vast area (including 20 munici
palities), but much more homogeneous in terms of demographical density,
economic structure and perspectives, local cultures and habits. Local
actors behave in a non-conflictual manner, seeking out personal social
ties with each other and interpreting tourism as the future key for develop-
ment by all local businesses (Saxena, 2006). The park behaves just like
a private business, managing both agricultural and tourism activities as
well as increasing occupational levels and income in the area. The
economic potential of the two parks appear similar, yet in Cilento the
network form of organisation is probably not well appreciated by local
agents who seem to carry on with their highly differentiated demands,
whereas in Matese, networks seem to be diffusely appreciated and linked
to territorial interests. The governance of the Matese Regional Park
appears to be more efficient in perceiving local expectations and translat-
ing them into policies and development actions. The homogeneous charac-
teristics of the park seem to facilitate the aggregating forces of the network
form of organisation, smoothening the decision-making process and opera-
tive actions (Polese, 2009).
Empirical evidence shows that an efficient network is characterised by
policies and dynamics consistent with territorial needs: sustainable tourism
networks combine tourism development plans (based on top-down pro
cesses of policy definition and the quest for resources) with local expecta-
tions and characteristics (projected through a bottom-up process by
territorial entities). This, however, may not be enough as the local govern-
ment must work towards creating a local vision and systemic policies – as
already mentioned, the network must have a guiding centre!
In order to acquire these characteristics, the network should be based
on common and shared values, objectives and identities. Weak formal
bonds, represented by the formal constitution of a network, are supported
by strong sentimental and cultural ties (representing effective aggregation
forces between territorial entities) (Granovetter, 1973).
Empirical evidence seems to highlight several key points. First, the
organisational form (the park model) is usually not sufficient in guarantee-
ing territorial competitiveness and long-term success. Since neither net-
works, nor parks, can be drawn on a map, they should derive from local
demands. Second, national and regional parks tend to be very different in
terms of effective territorial governance and government representative-
ness. It seems the larger the tourism network, the more a territorial area
shows difficulties in projecting a homogeneous image, a unique identity
and sharing the same opinion with regards to carrying out business and
adopting policies, strategies and operating actions. Finally, tourism net-
works need smooth communication channels between network nodes (enti-
ties); a recent contribution has shown how empowerment and
communication are important for sustainable tourism, highlighting the
relevance of the informative approach we are describing (Cole, 2006).
Both cases have shown the importance of participatory processes in
achieving effective tourism network governance. Net policy, net strategic
planning and also net dynamics and development should arise from partic-
ipatory processes, which must be enabled through common tools, such as
focus groups, territorial animation, resource qualification and so on.
Indeed, within territorial areas, socio-economic demands, environmental
care, the defence of historical and cultural heritage and the promotion of
typical local products are often key factors to local success; however in
these particular areas it seems difficult to value an approach to destination
management capable of strategically evaluating demand in tourism in
order to act and manage accordingly (Kastenholz, 2004). These instances,
in fact, may also represent conflicting objectives, especially without the
presence of an efficient super partes facilitator, or ‘network centre’, as
mentioned above. For this reason it seems important to facilitate a partici-
patory process of territorial animation in order to collect ideas, demands
and interests and then, accordingly, define policies and development paths
in line with differentiated territorial needs. This is best carried out in a cul-
turally open attitude closed to empowerment strategies (Sofield, 2003), in
line with most recent relational theories that propose a many to many
approach (Gummesson, 2006) not only in business to business interaction,
but in every relation that a business actor consciously or unconsciously
activates in light of a systemic value creation within its virtual network of
relations (Gummesson & Polese, 2009).

The analysis of the two Italian parks seems to be totally in line with a
similar and recent work (Cottrell & Cutumisu, 2006) that has sought out
traces of sustainable tourism development strategy within two Protected
Area Network park locations, one in Sweden and one in Romania. The
conceptual model we propose, however, suggests a decision-making
(network governance) approach characterised by alternating stages of
openness and closure between the net centre and nodes, regulated by the
net centre itself (see Figure 9.1). Such an approach would help promote
both communication channels and decision-making processes (Pellicano,
2004).
In the first stage (openness – ideation), the network centre must hear
demands in a democratic way (bottom-up communication requirements,
needs, expectations) in order fully to understand the context. In the second
stage (closure – assumption), the network centre has to choose the most
appropriate net policy and strategies along with defining the network’s
evolutionary path on its own (to avoid the risk of not delivering a
decision). In the third stage (openness – action) the network centre must
involve every territorial entity in the operative dynamic in order to valorise
available resources in a synergic action towards the defined goal. In the
fourth stage (closure – surveillance) the net centre has to check the opera-
tive results and stimulate system dynamics towards its goals and purposes
with a virtuous aligning process.
The model, therefore, is based on alternating stages of openness and
closure in order to produce systemic decisions consistent with territorial
expectations. The defining features of networks seem to facilitate sustaina-
ble tourism action, promoting the aggregation of territorial entities and
stimulating the synergic use of common resources, thus creating the
premises for producing and supplying a global tourism product. Tourism
nts
me
mo
Assumption
ing
en
Op
Ideation
Net
governance
Surveillance Action
Clo
su
re
mo
me
nts
Figure 9.1 Network strategic dynamic.

networks, however, should be based upon common values in order to
project a systemic image valorising homogeneous territorial resources and
characteristics. Briefly, it is worth noting that sustainable tourism nets may
be inhibited by planned net characteristics not aligned with territorial
expectations, negative cultural attitudes (towards relationships, but also
towards ‘sustainable development’) and scarce human capital.
On the other hand, sustainable tourism networks seem to facilitate top-
down and bottom-up communication and action processes, alternating
‘democratic/openness’ and ‘decision/closure’ stages, the valorisation of
local knowledge capital for the creation of territorial value, the manage-
ment of a ‘global tourism product’ and sustainable tourism actions pro-
moting services aimed at a rational use of territorial resources (Welford &
Ytterhus, 2004). Sustainable tourism networks, however, need to be
managed by a guiding centre capable of perceiving local requirements and
transforming them into a rational evolutionary path for the benefit and
competitiveness of territories and local entities (Polese & Moretta Tartagli-
one, 2007). In conclusion, we may say that sustainable tourism networks
may represent an effective organisational form and a positive cultural
approach to territorial governance, which promotes multidimensional
development (along ecological, economic and social dimensions) capable
of reinforcing the relational pattern between territorial entities to improve
the valorisation of resources and promote competitive behaviour.
References
Barile, S. (Ed). (2008). L’impresa come sistema – Contributi sull’approccio sistem-
ico vitale (2nd ed.). Torino: Giappichelli.
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal
of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
Bartlett, C. A. & Ghoshal, S. (1994). Beyond the m-form: Toward a managerial
theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2), 23–46.
Blain, C., Levy, S. E. & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2005). Destination branding: Insights and
practices from destination management organizations. Journal of Travel
Research, 43(4), 328–338.
Bramwell, B. & Lane, B. (2005). From niche to general relevance? Sustainable
tourism, research and the role of tourism journals. Journal of Tourism Studies,
16(2), 52–62.
Management, 21(1), 97–116.
Burt, R. (1983). Corporate profits and cooptation. New York: Academic Press.
Cole, S. (2006). Information and empowerment: The keys to achieving sustainable
tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(6), 629–644.
Cottrell, S. & Cutumisu, N. (2006). Sustainable tourism development strategy in
WWF Pan Parks: Case of a Swedish and Romanian National Park. Scandinavian
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 6(2), 150–167.
Dredge, D. (2006). Networks, conflict and collaborative communities. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 14(6), 562–581.
Flagestad, A. & Hope, C. A. (2001). Strategic success in winter sports destinations:
A sustainable value creation perspective. Tourism Management, 22(5), 445–461.
Font, A. R. (2000). Mass tourism and the demand for protected natural areas: A
travel cost approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
39(1), January, 97–116.
Golinelli, G. M. (2005). L’approccio sistemico al governo dell’impresa. Padova:
Cedam.
Golinelli, G. M. (2009). Business management: A viable system approach, forth-
coming.
Golinelli, G. M., Pastore, A., Gatti, M., Massaroni, E. & Vagnani, G. (2002). The
firm as a viable system: Managing inter-organisational relationships. Sinergie,
58, 65–98.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of soci-
ology, 78(6), 1360–1380.
Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource based theory of competitive advantage: Implica-
tions for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114–135.
Gronroos, C. (1990). Service management and marketing. Lexington: Lexington
Books.
Gummesson, E. (2006). Many to many marketing as a grand theory: A Nordic
school contribution. In R. F. Lusch & S. L. Vargo (Eds.), Toward a service-
dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions (pp. 339–353). New
York: Sharpe.
Gummesson, E. & Polese, F. (2009). B2B is not an island. Journal of Business and
Industrial Marketing, 24(5&6).
Hakansson, H. (1987). Industrial technological development: A network approach.
London: CroomHelm.
Hawkins, D. E. (2004). A protected areas ecotourism competitive cluster approach
to catalyse biodiversity conservation and economic growth in Bulgaria. Journal
of Sustainable Tourism, 12(3), 219–244.
Hu, W. & Wall, G. (2005). Environmental management, environmental image and
the competitive tourist attraction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13(6), 617–635.
Johanson, J. & Mattson, L. G. (1987). Interorganizational relation in industrial
system: A network approach compared with transaction-cost approach. Interna-
tional Studies of Management and Organization, 17(1), 34–38.
Kastenholz, E. (2004). Management of demand as a toll in sustainable tourist des-
tination development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388–408.
Leiper, N. (1990). Tourist attraction systems. Annals of Tourism Research, 17(3),
367–384.
Lorenzoni, G. (1992). Accordi reti e vantaggio competitivo. Milano: Etas Libri.
Lovelock, B. & Boyd, S. (2006). Impediments to a cross-border collaborative
model of destination management in the Catlins, New Zealand. Tourism Geog-
raphies, 8(2), 143–161.
McKercher, B. & Ho, P. S. Y. (2006). Assessing the tourism potential of smaller
cultural and heritage attractions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(5),
473–488.
Maclaren, F. T. (2002). The international year of ecotourism in review. Journal of
Mill, R. C. & Morrison, A. M. (1985). The tourism system. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Minguzzi, A. (2006). Destination competitiveness and the role of destination man-
agement organization (DMO): An Italian experience. In L. Lazzaretti & C. S.
Petrillo (Eds.), Tourism local systems and networking (pp. 197–208). London:
Elsevier.
Muhanna, E. (2006). Sustainable tourism development and environmental manage-
ment for developing countries. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 4(2),
14–30.
Murphy, P. E., Pritchard, M. P. & Smith, B. (2000). The destination product and
its impact on traveller perceptions. Tourism Management, 21(1), 43–52.
Normann, R. & Ramirez, R. (1994). Designing interactive strategy: From value
chain to value constellation. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Parolini, C. (1999). The value net. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Pellicano, M. (2004). Il governo strategico d’impresa. Torino: Giappichelli.
Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford: Basil Black-
well & Mott.
Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A
resource dependence perspective. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.
Polese, F. (2009). The influence of networking culture and social relationships on
value creation. Sinergie, forthcoming.
Polese, F. & Moretta Tartaglione, A. (2007). The inefficient governance of a net
with no brain: An analysis of town centre management. Proceeding of XXIII
Arethuse Conference on Local Resources Governance, September 26–28,
Termoli.
Porter, M. E. (1990). Competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review,
68(2), 73–93.
Ritchie, J. R. B. & Crouch, G. (2003). The competitive destination: A sustainable
tourism perspective. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
Saxena, G. (2006). Beyond mistrust and competition: The role of social and per-
sonal bonding processes in sustaining livelihoods of rural tourism businesses: A
case of the Peak District National Park. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 8(4), 263–277.
Silva, G. & McDill, M. E. (2004). Barriers to ecotourism supplier success: A com-
parison of agency and business perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
12(4), 289–305.
Smith, S. L. J. (1994). The tourism product. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(3),
582–595.
Sofield, T. (2003). Empowerment for sustainable tourism development. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Welford, R. & Ytterhus, B. (2004). Sustainable development and tourism destina-
tion management: A case study of the Lillehammer region, Norway. Interna-
tional Journal for Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 11(4),
410–422.
10 Tourism destinations
A network analysis of the web space
Rodolfo Baggio and
Magda Antonioli Corigliano
Introduction
The dynamics of the international tourism landscape demands ever more
the adoption of innovative and structured approaches. The evolution of
tourist consumption towards models of increasing personalisation, the
increasing competitive pressure between destinations, and the globalisation
of the tourist market are only some of the factors that have dictated the
need to adopt an ‘integrated management’ of tourist locations. The intro-
duction of the logic of destination management represents an attempt to
embrace instruments to manage, in a coordinated way, the potential of a
tourist attraction. The aim is, on one hand, that of valuing the complemen-
tarities between the natural resources and services in terms of their ability
to be exploited. On the other hand, the goal is to stimulate the start of
solid cooperative relationships among all stakeholders (public and private),
with the additional objective of more profitable and efficient promotional
and commercialisation activities on the international market (Dwyer &
Kim, 2003; Framke, 2002). The empirical evidence shows the existence of
various models of destinations or types of districts, which differ in terms of
integration (or fragmentation) levels, and therefore of coordination
between the public and private actors operating in a certain area (Lozano,
Gòmez & Rey-Maquieira, 2005).
Amongst the conditions that over the course of the last few years have
allowed integrated destinations to emerge, and have given the right impor-
tance to the whole territorial network in an innovative and original way,
information and communication technologies (ICTs), with their support to
the operational and management processes, have assumed a decisive posi-
tion. They have proved to be critical for the development of this ‘informa-
tion intensive’ sector and have played an important role in binding up the
local tourism operators favouring the integration of the destination
product/service chain and spreading common competences and know-how
(Buhalis, 2003; Pollock, 1995).
A growing strand of literature considers a destination as a typical
complex adaptive system (Baggio, 2008). Characteristics such as non-linear
126 R. Baggio and M. Antonioli Corigliano
relationships among the system components, self-organisation of the struc-
tures, resilience to external shocks are defining traits for a complex adap-
tive system (Holland, 1995), and can be easily identified in a tourism
destination. A network graph representation, in which the nodes corres-
pond to the organisations (public or private) belonging to the local tourism
system, is especially suited for this type of system. The study presented in
this work uses the science and tools of network thinking to examine the
structural properties of the hyperlinks between the websites of tourism
operators in two destinations: the Fiji Islands and Elba, Italy.
Literature review
The Fiji Islands and Elba (Italy) share many similarities. The two destina-
tions offer ‘sun and sand’ tourism experiences, they both receive around
500,000 visitors per year, with three million overnights, and strong season-
ality. The accommodation capacity is of the same order of magnitude
(some ten thousand bed places). In both cases the economies are highly
dependent on the spending generated by tourism activities. The Internet
penetration is of a good level in both destinations and most companies,
mainly in the tourism field, own a website. Elba is considered a ‘mature’
tourism destination (Tallinucci & Testa, 2006). It has a long history and
has gone through a number of different expansion and reorganisation
cycles. The great majority of the stakeholders are small- and medium-sized
companies, mostly family run. Several associations and consortia operate
in the area trying to overcome an excessive ‘independence’ of the com-
panies by suggesting and developing different kinds of collaboration pro-
grammes. Geographic, economic and political factors have not favoured a
full development of tourism in Fiji (Harrison, 2004). The destination is
divided into a number of different geographical locations (different islands)
and the supply structure is highly fragmented. The hospitality sector
mainly relies on ‘all inclusive’ resorts that are self-sufficient and have
limited collaboration with other organisations besides the very basic supply
chain relationships. Only recently central tourism organisations have
started designing and realising coordinated development plans.
This work is based upon the assumption that the connections among
the websites (hyperlinks) may be considered not simply as a technological
manifestation but also as a reflection of social processes. The structure of
hyperlinks form patterns based on the designs and aspirations of the indi-
viduals or organisations that own websites. A growing literature suggests
that these networks reflect offline connections among social actors and
support specific social or communicative functions (Park, 2003).
Even considering the warnings and the limitations on the validity of this
type of interpretation, well discussed by Thelwall (2006), when websites
belonging to commercial companies are considered, it can be reasonably
assumed that the layout of the network is a reflection of the structural
Tourism destinations 127
characteristics of the social network from which it originates. The impor-
tance given to the practice of hyperlinking (Walker, 2002) further supports
this conjecture. A two-way relationship exists between the virtual and the
real world: on one side, the online linkages correspond to social relations
in the offline world; on the other side, offline interactions can affect the
way in which online relationships are established and developed (Birnie &
Horvath, 2002; Wellman, 2001).
The rest of this chapter examines how network analysis methods can
help us understanding the interactions between tourism operators within a
destination. The approach followed considers the networks from a topolo-
gical point of view, and therefore no attempt is made to identify the nature
or the features of single actors. The links between websites, in the assump-
tion made, represent some kind of transaction or collaboration agreement
between the companies. Quantitative network analysis methods are used
to compare the network characteristics of the two tourism destinations.
The main topological characteristics are measured, both from a static and
a dynamic point of view. The results show that network metrics can be
used to highlight the main features of the destination network and of the
underlying social and economic system.
Network models
A long tradition, started with the 1736 paper by Leonhard Euler on the
Königsberg bridges, has provided a comprehensive set of mathematical
tools for analysing networks and the graphs they represent. During the
twentieth century, these techniques have been applied to the study of a
wide range of systems. In the first half of last century, the ideas and tech-
niques developed for the study of these abstract objects are applied to a
completely different field. Realising that a group of individuals can be rep-
resented by enumerating the actors of the group and their mutual relation-
ships, sociologists start using graph theory and methods to describe and
analyse the patterns of social relations (Freeman, 2004). In the last years,
an active community of physicists and mathematicians has then exploited
the huge amount of data available in digital form through the Internet to
develop a whole new set of models. With these it has been possible to
describe static structural and dynamical characteristics of a wide range of
natural and artificial complex networks (Albert & Barabási, 2002; Bocca
letti, Latora, Moreno, Chavez & Hwang, 2006; Watts, 2004).
Several measurements are available today to characterise a network
structure (da Fontoura Costa, Rodrigues, Travieso & Villas Boas, 2007).
Their origins can be traced to a combination of those coming from the tra-
dition of social network analysis with the outcomes of the work of the
community of statistical physicists. A few of these metrics are normally
considered sufficient to describe fully topology and behaviour of a complex
network:
• Degree distribution P(k): the frequency distribution of the number of
the linkages among the network elements.
• Average path length L: the mean shortest path between any two nodes,
and diameter D: the maximal distance connecting any two nodes.
Compact networks exhibit small values for D and L.
• Clustering coefficient C: a measure of the inhomogeneity of the local
density of links expressing the concentration of the connections of a
node’s neighbours.
• Assortativity: the correlation between the degrees of neighbour nodes.
If positive (assortative network), the well-connected elements tend to
be linked to each other. The formation of strongly connected subnet-
works (communities) and their strength are strongly affected by this
quantity.
• Efficiency (local Eloc or global Eglob): giving a quantitative measurement
of the capacity of the system to exchange information over the
network.
The mathematical expressions and algorithms to calculate these quantities

can be found in one of the review papers recently published (Albert &
Barabási, 2002; Boccaletti et al., 2006). In assessing the structural charac-
teristics of a network the degree distribution has a peculiar importance. In
the random graphs described by Erdös and Rényi (1959), and the small-
world (SW) networks depicted by Watts and Strogatz (1998), P(k) has an
exponential (Poissonian or Gaussian) form. SW networks also exhibit large
clustering coefficients and short average path lengths. The scale-free net-
works unveiled by Barabási and Albert (1999) have a P(k) showing a
power-law behaviour: P(k) ~ k-γ. These networks are largely uneven, with
no characteristic mean nodal degree (the mean of a Poissonian distribu-
tion). A few nodes act as very connected hubs, with a large number of ties,
while the majority of nodes have a small number of links. Other networks
described in the literature show intermediate behaviours with a basic
power-law regime followed by some sharp cut-off (exponential or Gaus-
sian decay) of the tail.
Methodology
The analysis presented here concerns the network formed by the websites
belonging to core tourism operators in each destination: accommodation
(hotels, residences, camping sites etc.), intermediaries (travel agencies and
tour operators), transport, regulation bodies, services, etc. Links among
the websites were listed by using a simple crawler and complementing the
data obtained with a ‘manual’ count of the hyperlinks to overcome the
limitations of the program used (such as, for example, the impossibility to
find hyperlinks embedded in Flash applications or Java applets). All links
are considered of directed nature. The statistical analysis of the network
thus obtained is carried on by using a standard software package: Pajek
(Batagelj & Mrvar, 2004) and programs written using the Matlab
(MATLAB, 2004) development environment.
The graphical representation of the two networks is given in Figure
10.1. As it can be seen, both networks exhibit a definite structure, very dif-
ferent from what it would be if the links were distributed at random. The
numeric values calculated for the main characteristic parameters of the two
networks are given in Table 10.1.
These characteristics indicate that both networks are rather sparse,
showing very low densities and high proportions of totally unconnected
websites. Diameters and average path lengths are almost in line with those
exhibited by similar systems (Albert & Barabási, 2002; Boccaletti et al.,
2006). The relatively small values for D and L would denote a good com-
pactness of the main connected components of both networks. However,
the clustering coefficient and the local and global efficiency of the graphs
are considerably lower than those found for comparable arrangements.
Elba network Fiji network
Figure 10.1 The Elba and Fiji networks.
Table 10.1 Main characteristics of Elba and Fiji networks
Elba Fiji
Number of nodes 468 492

Link density (δ) 0.0023 0.0016
nodes with no connections 21% 35%
Average path length (L) 4.5 2.9
Diameter (D) 11 6
Clustering coefficient (C) 0.003 0.024
Efficiency
local 0.0145 0.0275
global 0.1698 0.0710
Assortative mixing coefficient –0.101 ± 0.094 –0.137 ± 0.102
These values express the fact that the overall topological connectivity of
the networks is quite loose. Finally, it is notable that for both networks,
the assortative mixing coefficient is small and, more importantly, negative.
This is the opposite of what is commonly found for social networks in
which, typically, the most connected nodes tend to link nodes with similar
degrees (Newman, 2003).
The cumulative in-degree (kin) and out-degree (kout) distributions (the
distributions of the number of links incoming to a node or outgoing from
it) are shown in Figure 10.2. For Elba network, both distributions follow a
power-law (P(k) ~ k-γ) whose exponents are: out-degree γout = 1.89 and in-
degree γin = 2.96. In the Fiji network a pure power-law behaviour can be
attributed only to the in-degree distribution (exponent is: γin = 2.91). The
out-degree distribution, instead, shows a clear cut-off at high k values. The
best fit for this distribution is a function of the form P(k) ~ k-γ exp(–k/kc),
with γout = 1.4 (the central part of the distribution scales as a power-law)
and kc = 15.
Both in-degree exponents are higher than those measured for the Web:
γin ~ 2.1 (Broder et al., 2000). This implies a greater concentration of the
networks. Out-degree exponents are, instead, much lower (typical Web
value is γout ~ 2.7); i.e. the distribution of the links is much more flat and
spread.
When considering the data presented here as regarding a purely technolo-
gical network, we must conclude that the low connectivity and modularity
(i.e. low and sparse number of connected communities or clusters) and the
low efficiency represent a waste of resources both from a technical and an
organisational point of view. These destinations appear to be missing out
on the advantages of collaboration and cooperation mechanisms on the
Elba network Fiji network

P(>k) Out-degree P(>k) Out-degree
In-degree In-degree
1.0E � 02 1.0E � 02
1.0E � 01 1.0E � 01
1.0E � 00 1.0E � 00
1.0E � 00 1.0E � 01 1.0E � 02 k 1.0E � 00 1.0E � 01 1.0E � 02 k
Figure 10.2 In-degree and out-degree cumulative distributions for Elba and Fiji
networks.
Internet that could greatly improve the organisation and the management
of the destination and its capacity to face a highly competitive globalised
market. The benefits of sharing technological resources and functionalities
should be well known and have been emphasised several times (Barua,
Whinston & Yin, 2000; McLaren, Head & Yuan, 2002; Walker, 2002),
but in the destinations examined here this looks to be almost completely
neglected. From a strategic development perspective, the situation is even
more dangerous. Future search engines and recommendation systems, in
fact, will be based on dynamic agents whose main task is the dynamic
identification of connected communities on the web (Adomavicius &
Tuzhilin, 2005; Baggio, 2006; Lawrence, 2000). The websites of tourism
operators in destinations not forming well-recognisable ‘communities’
through dense interconnections will be hardly reachable by a casual user.
This will have, obviously, unfavourable consequences for the effectiveness
of the marketing and communication activities and their economic
outcomes.
As discussed above, an assumption of this work is that the network of
destination websites represents more than an artificial technological
network. The web space of a tourism destination can be seen as a represen-
tation of the underlying economic and social network. In this context, our
analysis can provide interesting insights. Under this assumption, the
general low connectivity and low clustering characteristics of both net-
works are a clear indication of a very limited degree of collaboration or
cooperation among the stakeholders. The negativity of the assortative
mixing coefficient also reinforces this reading (Baggio, 2007). A confirma-
tion of this interpretation comes from previous studies on Elba (Tallinucci
& Testa, 2006) where it has been argued that a reason is the strong inde-
pendency in which small family-run enterprises (the vast majority of the
tourism businesses on the island) are conducted. The same effect is tracea-
ble in Fiji. Here, the structure of the tourism industry is mainly based on
large resorts that have little collaboration with other organisations (Harri-
son, 2004).
Let us consider now the degree distributions (Figure 10.2). The out-
degree distribution of Fiji network exhibits a marked cut-off at high k. The
complex network analysis literature interprets this characteristic as the
result of some kind of constraint on the evolution (growth) process of the
network. Cost limitations in forming connections, ageing of nodes who
stop creating links after a certain period of time, spatial confinements of
the network or finite lifetimes, have been proposed as possible explana-
tions (Boccaletti et al., 2006).
Considering the destinations’ characteristics described above, if we
accept the idea that a tourism destination has some kind of evolutionary
path (Butler, 1980), we may legitimately say that Fiji is at an earlier stage
of development, as a tourism destination, than Elba. In early stages of
development, tourism organisations exist, but they have not yet connected
to others. This happens because they probably do not feel such a necessity
or because they have not yet recognised the existence of other stakehold-
ers. Larger organisations or associations, generally responsible for the
higher degrees in the network, still have to establish a link with the newer
nodes. We may say that, in this situation, there exists a limitation in (some
of) the nodes’ ability to process information about all the other nodes of
the network. This information filtering is able to generate (Mossa, Bar-
thélémy, Stanley & Amaral, 2002) the exponential truncation found in the
degree distribution of a network, in our case the one of Fiji websites.
A confirmation to the existence of a relationship between the modifica-
tions in the network topology and the evolution of a destination has also
been found in other cases. Even if only at a qualitative level, for example,
Pavlovich and Kearins (2004) in their analysis of Waitomo (New Zealand)
note a significant structural change, with an increase in number and hetero
geneity of the interconnections, and connect it with the evolutionary
growth of the destination.
The exploratory investigation presented in this chapter has a number of
important implications in the field of tourism studies. First of all it must be
noticed that the results discussed here have been obtained by combining a
quantitative and a qualitative approach. As in many other disciplines, in
fact, the results of numerical analyses, to be ‘useful’ and significant, need a
solid layer of interpretation that can only be possible by recurring to the
outcomes of qualitative studies on the same subject. Conversely, qualita-
tive investigations can greatly benefit from the possibility of an ‘independ-
ent’ quantitative confirmation of the results. This is the case, for example,
of the use of specific network metrics for assessing the extent of coop
eration in a destination.
The application of network analysis to the management of both single
and groups of organisations is not a new idea. The framework, the
methods for both data collection and analysis and the implications in
organisation theory and research have been known for a long time, at least
among some (although not many) scholars (Tichy, Tushman & Fombrun,
1979).
Managers willing to encourage effective networking practices should be
first aware of the structure and the general dynamic behaviour of a
network. The structure can be studied by using method such as those pre-
sented in this chapter and the patterns of change can be identified and
measured as it has been done in comparing the different maturity stages of
Elba and Fiji. With such an environmental knowledge, it may be more
comfortable to evaluate the stakeholder’s role in the network and to assess
the congruence between its strategic goals and possible evolutionary sce-
narios. The acknowledgement of the path of system’s evolution and its
implications may put a manager in a better position to take full advantage
of the opportunities while avoiding the threats related to the configuration
(Koka, Madhavan & Prescott, 2006).
A great part of the effectiveness of a networked system is due to the
actions of individual actors and single stakeholders may benefit from a
network involvement apart from the form of governance. However, it has
been shown that collective outcomes, effectiveness and behaviours are sig-
nificantly influenced by governance forms based on a systemic approach
(Berry et al., 2004; Farrell & Twining-Ward, 2004). And this is more valid
when considering an inherently networked system such as a tourism desti-
nation (Agostinho & Teixeira de Castro, 2003; Bickerdyke, 1996).
From a policy perspective, ‘when governments, communities, founda-
tions, or regional industry groups think about how they can improve their
economy, disaster preparedness, competitiveness, health and well-being of
citizens, and so on, collaboration through an interorganizational network
is an approach that is increasingly utilized’ (Provan, Fish & Sydow, 2007,
p. 512). The governance style of a network system can have significant
implications for its overall effectiveness. An effective management requires
the capability to appreciate and react to both internal and external
demands, mainly when dealing with the tensions that may arise (Provan &
Kenis, 2008). In this respect, the methods of network science can prove
highly beneficial in deepening the knowledge of the whole system and,
coupled with more traditional procedures, can provide powerful tools to
enable those adaptive management practices considered by many the only
practical way to steer the collective efforts of multiple organisations
(Bankes, 2002; Farrell & Twining-Ward, 2004; Holling, 1978; Ritter,
Wilkinson & Johnston, 2004).
The possibility to analyse in a quantitative way the relationships between
tourism operators opens new ways to the researcher interested in the struc-
ture, the evolution, the outcomes, the effectiveness and the governance of
the system. In addition, these methods and the emphasis on the whole
network and not only on the particular relations that any organisation
might have, offer effective tools to practitioners, both at single operator and
at whole destination level, to strengthen their capacity of intervention.
As discussed in the introduction, not much has been done so far in
tourism studies when network analysis is concerned. Only a few authors
have approached the different management, policy and governance issues
by using these methods (Morrison, Lynch & Johns, 2004; Pavlovich &
Kearins, 2004; Pforr, 2002; Scott, Cooper & Baggio, 2008). This work has
shown how it is possible to use network analysis techniques in the tourism
field and what kind of outcomes and considerations may emerge. Obvi-
ously this is only the beginning of a research that will be long, but has a
great potential.

In the last few years, the techniques and methods of complex networks
analysis have developed significantly. An increasing literature has studied a
great variety of theoretical and empirical aspects of networks of many
types. Tourism systems, in spite of the recognised networked characteristics,
have been almost absent from these investigations. In this sector, only a
limited number of papers have employed basic social network analysis
methods, and generally only at a qualitative level. The present contribution,
which is part of a wider research project, is one of the first attempts at using
quantitative network analysis models in the study of tourism destinations.
We have considered two such systems. The analysis of their web spaces
has provided an assessment of the main characteristics of the two net-
works. With the hypothesis that the technological system represents the
underlying economic and social group, we have described the main fea-
tures of the structure of the system and emphasised the aspects of collabo-
ration and cooperation. Moreover, by assuming the existence of an
evolutionary growth for a tourism destination, the basic topological fea-
tures of the two networks have been connected with such evolution.
The exploratory nature of the analysis performed here and the limited
number of examples examined put an obvious limit on the generalisation
of our results. However, we have given evidence of the possibility to assess
quantitatively the structural characteristics of the network of tourism
stakeholders. The coupling of sound quantitative analysis methods with
qualitative interpretations of the main characteristics of a tourism destina-
tion can prove, in our opinion, extremely useful for the organisations
responsible for the management of the system. The approach used here can
provide a better appraisal and give quantitative support to the interpreta-
tion of a number of phenomena, and may better help in directing planning
activities. It is our firm conviction that future and more extensive work,
already under way, will reinforce the conclusions of this work, mainly
from a methodological point of view and will confirm the effectiveness of
the combined quantitative/qualitative approach used here.
References
Adomavicius, G. & Tuzhilin, A. (2005). Toward the next generation of recom-
mender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions. IEEE
Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17(6), 734–749.
Agostinho, M. E. & Teixeira de Castro, G. (2003). Co-creating a self-organizing
management system: A Brazilian experience. Paper presented at the Complexity,
Ethics and Creativity Conference, London School of Economics. Retrieved
October 10, 2007, from: http://www.psych.lse.ac.uk/complexity/Conference/
AgostinhoCastro.pdf.
Albert, R. & Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks.
Review of Modern Physics, 74(1), 47–91.
Baggio, R. (2006). Complex systems, information technologies and tourism: A
network point of view. Information Technology and Tourism, 8(1), 15–29.
Baggio, R. (2007). The web graph of a tourism system. Physica A, 379(2),
727–734.
Baggio, R. (2008). Symptoms of complexity in a tourism system. Tourism Analysis,
13(1), 1–20.
Bankes, S. C. (2002). Tools and techniques for developing policies for complex and
uncertain systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences of the
USA, 99 (suppl. 3), 7263–7266.
Barabási, A.-L. & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks.
Science, 286(5439), 509–512.
Barua, A., Whinston, A. B. & Yin, F. (2000). Value and productivity in the Inter-
net economy. Computer, 33(5), 102–105.
Batagelj, V. & Mrvar, A. (2004). Pajek: Program for large network analysis.
Retrieved December 20, 2007, from: http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/
pajek/.
Berry, F., Brower, R., Choi, S. O., Goa, W. X., Jang, H. S., Kwon, M. & Word, J.
(2004). Three traditions of network research: What the public management
research agenda can learn from other research communities. Public Administra-
tion Review, 64(5), 539–552.
Bickerdyke, I. (1996). Australia: The evolving structure and strategies of business
networks. In OECD (Ed.), Networks of enterprises and local development: Com-
peting and co-operating in local productive systems (pp. 203–216). Paris: Organ-
isation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Birnie, S. A. & Horvath, P. (2002). Psychological predictors of Internet social com-
munication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(4). Retrieved
December 20, 2007, from: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol. 7/issue4/horvath.html.
Boccaletti, S., Latora, V., Moreno, Y., Chavez, M. & Hwang, D.-U. (2006).
Complex networks: Structure and dynamics. Physics Reports, 424(4–5),
175–308.
Broder, A. Z., Kumar, S. R., Maghoul, F., Raghavan, P., Rajagopalan, S., Stata, R.,
Tomkins, A. & Wiener, J. L. (2000). Graph structure in the web. Computer Net-
works, 33(1–6), 309–320.
Buhalis, D. (2003). eTourism: Information technology for strategic tourism man-
agement. Harlow, UK: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
Butler, R. W. (1980). The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution: Implications
for management of resources. Canadian Geographer, 24(1), 5–12.
da Fontoura Costa, L., Rodrigues, A., Travieso, G. & Villas Boas, P. R. (2007).
Characterization of complex networks: A survey of measurements. Advances in
Physics, 56(1), 167–242.
Dwyer, L. & Kim, C. W. (2003). Destination competitiveness: A model and indic-
ators. Current Issues in Tourism, 6(5), 369–414.
Erdös, P. & Rényi, A. (1959). On random graphs. Publicationes Mathematicae
(Debrecen), 6, 290–297.
Farrell, B. H. & Twining-Ward, L. (2004). Reconceptualizing tourism. Annals of
Framke, W. (2002). The destination as a concept: A discussion of the business-
related perspective versus the socio-cultural approach in tourism theory. Scan-
dinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 2(2), 92–108.
Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social network analysis: A study in the
sociology of science. Vancouver: Empirical Press.
Harrison, D. (2004). Tourism in Pacific Islands. Journal of Pacific Studies,
26(1&2), 1–28.
Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Reading,
MA: Helix Books.
Holling, C. S. (Ed.). (1978). Adaptive environmental assessment and management.
New York: John Wiley.
Koka, B. R., Madhavan, R. & Prescott, J. E. (2006). The evolution of interfirm
networks: Environmental effects on patterns of network change. Academy of
Lawrence, S. (2000). Context in web search. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin,
23(3), 25–32.
Lozano, J., Gómez, C. & Rey-Maquieira, J. (2005). An analysis of the evolution of
tourism destinations from the point of view of the economic growth theory (Nota
di lavoro 146.2005). Milan: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei. Retrieved March 15,
2006 from: http://www.feem.it/Feem/Pub/Publications/WPapers/default.htm.
McLaren, T., Head, M. & Yuan, Y. (2002). Supply chain collaboration altern-
atives: Understanding the expected costs and benefits. Internet Research: Elec-
tronic Networking Applications and Policy, 12(4), 348–364.
MATLAB. (2004). MATLAB (Version 7, R14 – 2004). Natick, MA: Matworks
Inc.
Morrison, A., Lynch, P. & Johns, N. (2004). International tourism networks. Inter-
national Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(3), 197–202.
Mossa, S., Barthélémy, M., Stanley, H. E. & Amaral, L. A. N. (2002). Truncation
of power law behavior in ‘scale-free’ network models due to information filter-
ing. Physical Review Letters, 88(13), art. 138701.
Newman, M. E. J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM
Review, 45(2), 167–256.
Park, H. W. (2003). Hyperlink network analysis: A new method for the study of
social structure on the web. Connections, 25(1), 49–61.
Pavlovich, K. & Kearins, K. (2004). Structural embeddedness and community-
building through collaborative network relationships. M@n@gement, 7(3),
195–214.
Pforr, C. (2002). The ‘makers and shapers’ of tourism policy in the northern terri-
tory of Australia: A policy network analysis of actors and their relational con-
stellations. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 9(2), 134–151.
Pollock, A. (1995). Occasional studies: The impact of information technology on
destination marketing. EIU Travel and Tourism Analyst, 3, 66–83.
Provan, K. G., Fish, A. & Sydow, J. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the
network level: A review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of
Management, 33(3), 479–516.
Provan, K. G. & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, man-
agement, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 18(2), 229–252.
Ritter, T., Wilkinson, I. F. & Johnston, W. J. (2004). Managing in complex busi-
ness networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(3), 175–183.
Scott, N., Cooper, C. & Baggio, R. (2008). Destination networks: Theory and
practice in four Australian cases. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1), 169–188.
Tallinucci, V. & Testa, M. (2006). Marketing per le isole. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Thelwall, M. (2006). Interpreting social science link analysis research: A theoretical
framework. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Tech-
nology, 57(1), 60–68.
Tichy, N. M., Tushman, M. L. & Fombrun, C. (1979). Social network analysis for
organizations. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 507–519.
Walker, J. (2002). Links and power: The political economy of linking on the web.
Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Hypertext Conference, Baltimore, MD,
pp. 72–73.
Watts, D. J. (2004). The ‘new’ science of networks. Annual Review of Sociology,
30, 243–270.
Watts, D. J. & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small world’ net-
works. Nature, 393(6684), 440–442.
Wellman, B. (2001). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293(5537),
2031–2034.
11 Exploring stakeholder roles in
destination management
networks
Meredith Lawrence
Introduction
Understanding the process in which decision making for tourism occurs
is considered to provide possibly the most important tool in the sustainable
management of tourism (Richins & Pearce, 2000). As tourism planning
and policy development takes place in dynamic, multi-actor settings, it is
important to understand how different conceptions of tourism, different
values and ideas are mediated in planning and policy processes (Hall &
Jenkins, 1995). Understanding tourism policy and planning processes,
however, requires the analyst to step beyond a single issue to develop an
appreciation for the multilayered, cross-sectoral issues that characterise
tourism (Lawrence & Dredge, 2007). Understanding these processes is
important for two reasons: (1) investigating how policy is made can help
develop explanatory insights that can be fed back into the process by way
of refinement and improvement; and (2) insights into how policy is made
can be used to develop normative models of policy that may inform policy
practice and management (Lawrence & Dredge, 2007).
Analysis should also examine the ‘calibre of activists, the extent of
mobilization among those affected by policies and the outlooks or
ideologies of the many actors who populate a system’ (Considine, 1994,
p. 105). As these stakeholders do not function independently, policy
is considered to emerge as a result of group achievement that reflects
the character, wisdom and negotiations of interdependent individuals
(p. 105). As a consequence, policy emerges because individuals find
ways to act together, and although conflict-ridden policy is primarily a
joint action among a complex range of actors (p. 105). As Considine
(p. 105) contends, ‘tracing the line of joint effort, including those which
fail, reveals a dazzling array of manoeuvres’. This chapter draws on
concepts derived from policy network theories to develop critical under-
standings of network dynamics of stakeholders actively engaged in tourism
destination policy and management systems. From this, a second aim
of this chapter is to demonstrate the application of this theoretical
framework to examine the policy and destination management system that
Exploring stakeholder roles 139
has occurred for the popular Australian destination of Byron Bay from
1988 to 2005.
Literature review
Studying networks has become an accepted way of understanding
organisational life (Stevenson & Greenberg, 2000) and a major focus for
organisational theorists since the mid 1970s (Milward & Wamsley, 1984).
Networks can be considered from various organisational perspectives, for
example, how inter-organisational business networks function, and from a
policy network perspective, where networks are seen as an important
conduit for managing public–private relationships and understanding
structures of governance (Dredge, 2003). Although traditionally two
separate branches of literature, there has been an increasing tendency to
connect the political and organisational socio-logical theoretical notions
with each other given that both pay attention to strategies that
organisations use to influence each other (Klijn, 1996).
Policy networks have therefore emerged as powerful organising
perspectives in efforts to understand relational conceptions of destination
management policy making (e.g. Burstein, 1991; Dredge, 2001, 2003,
2006a; Kerr, 2003; Marsh, 1998; Milward & Walmsley, 1984; Rhodes,
1997; Tyler & Dinan, 2001). Actor or stakeholder networks are considered
to provide a key role in our understanding of how policy systems learn,
innovate and act upon themselves (Dluhy, 1981, cited by Considine, 1994,
p. 104). According to Rowley (1997, p. 6) ‘the purpose of network analysis
is to examine the relational system in which actors dwell and to determine
how the nature of relationship structures impacts behaviours’. The study
of tourism policy and management systems framed around concepts of
policy networks provides a mechanism to examine the way in which the
structure of relations, the flow of power, influences and resources surround
formal collaborative mechanisms and partnerships (Dredge, 2003).
Tyler and Dinan (2001) surmise that a network approach is worthwhile
and justifiable as an approach to explain and describe much about the
structure and operations within the tourism policy arena. They adopted a
policy network approach to examine the role of interest groups and their
relationship with government in tourism policy development in England.
Similarly, Kerr (2003) applied a policy network approach to explain
patterns of interest group interaction in tourism policy in Scotland. Kerr
(2003) argued that a policy network approach facilitates a description of
the processes in which tourism is managed, organised and developed, and
allows the link between micro-levels and macro-levels of decision making
to be explored. Tyler and Dinan (2001) suggest that a longitudinal study
of the policy sector would be beneficial in tracking how a network
develops over time, and that this would help to show how policy dynamics
are established, how they vary with time, how they vary between the
140 M. Lawrence
strategic policy making and the development of technical policy
programmes and to expand research away from just the trade and
associated groups to include the many amenity groups that manage the
tourism resources and represent destination communities. Hall (2000)
further suggests that social and economic networks provide a useful way
of capturing a conception of relational social dynamics that exist in
tourism planning and everyday life.
Dredge (2006a) advocates that case studies can contribute important
insights into the role and influence of networks and are best understood at
the level at which destination planning and management takes place. She
also points out that historical applications of networks to tourism at a
destination level are rare, and that there is a need for the greater
understanding of the interplay between micro and macro influences that
shape the evolution of networks over time and space. Dredge (2004,
2006a) identifies a number of factors that can be used to examine how
networks intersect and influence tourism policy and planning processes at
a destination level. These factors were derived by Dredge from seminal
work of Van Waarden (1992) and developed by Howlett and Ramesh
(1995), Klijn (1995), Marsh (1998) and others. These factors are:
• the institutional space in which the tourism policy and planning occurs
– the extent to which the planning process is seen to occur within a
legitimate institutional space and the congruency between the
interpretations of this institutional space by different networks;
• issue networks – the characteristics of policy issue networks;
• policy spaces of inclusion and exclusion – the influence of networks on
creating spaces of collaboration and non-collaboration;
• spaces of collaboration and non-collaboration – the influence of
networks on spaces of collaboration and non-collaboration;
• boundaries of tension and difference – the nature of boundaries of
difference, and whether these are sites of conflict and tension or sites
of learning, innovation and creativity;
• locus of control and decision making – where power is situated;
• the nature of relational ties – the influence of relational ties between
networks;
• upon collaborative planning processes.
This study uses these factors to investigate the properties and dynamics of
policy issue networks that emerged within the destination management
system for Byron Bay from 1988 to 2005. As Dredge (2006a, p. 272)
explains the use of networks as a framework for the analysis of tourism
planning and policy processes facilitates improved understandings of how
‘policy emerges from a complex web of interactions between a diversity of
public and private sector actors and agencies’.
Methodology
A case study research design was utilised to trace and explore the roles,
activities and network interactions of stakeholders actively involved in the
Byron Bay tourism policy and planning system. Three data collection
methods were used: (1) analysis of archival sources (e.g. academic literat-
ure, reports and consultancies, policy and planning documents and media
reports); (2) semi-structured interviews with 39 participants representing
stakeholder groups (see Table 11.1); and (3) participant observation by the
researcher at relevant forums and meetings related to the system from Feb-
ruary 2003 until June 2005. These methods were used to trace and explore
the roles, activities, influences and interactions of stakeholders within the
system from 1988 to 2005. For the purposes of this research, a stakeholder
group was defined as any individual or group that had actively been
involved in the system during 1988 to 2005.
A purposeful sampling technique was used to identify representatives of
stakeholder groups actively functioning within the Byron Bay tourism
policy and planning system from 1988 to 2005. Representatives of stake-
holder groups were identified using a ‘reputations’ approach where the
researcher studies all or some of those named on a list of nominees pro-
duced by knowledgeable informants. Three informants were selected based
on their knowledge of tourism policy and planning processes at regional,
Table 11.1 Stakeholder groups represented in this study
Stakeholder group Number of

representatives
interviewed*
Adult Community Education, Byron Shire 1

Bay Residents Against Community Erosion 3
Byron Bay accommodation booking agencies (real estate agents 5
and Internet agencies)
Byron Bay Businesses for the Future 3
Byron Bay Chamber of Commerce 3
Byron Environment Centre 1
Byron Shire Council – Councillors 5
Byron Shire Council – senior staff/planners 4
Byron Shire Tourist Association 2
Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources 2
Department of State and Regional Development 1
National Parks and Wildlife Service/Cape Byron Headland Trust 2
Northern Rivers Regional Development Board 3
Northern Rivers Tourism 6
Planning consultant 1
Southern Cross University 1
Tourism New South Wales 4
Notes
* Some participants represented more than one stakeholder group.
142 M. Lawrence
state and national levels pertinent to Byron Bay. These informants helped
devise a potential list of interviewees who were reputed to be the members
of the system and were knowledgeable about tourism and policy and plan-
ning issues and processes that had occurred for Byron Bay from 1988 to
2005. A snowball technique was used whereby interview participants were
asked to identify other informants within the system and interviews were
conducted until no new information was revealed. A semi-structured inter-
view format was used to guide the interview process in order to provide a
fluid responsive interview environment where emerging themes and issues
could be explored.
Case study background

Located 180 kilometres south of the Australian city of Brisbane and 800
kilometres north of Sydney, Byron Shire is situated within the Northern
Rivers region that extends from the Queensland border at Tweed Heads,
south to Grafton and inland to the upper reaches of the Clarence River.
The region is diversified with major World Heritage-listed rainforests, an
extensive coastal region that provides excellent bathing and surf beaches,
unspoilt hinterland, tropical agriculture, laid-back and diverse cultural
communities and innovative enterprises.
Within the shire, the destination of Byron Bay is well established as a
popular and fashionable tourist destination that attracts significant
numbers of domestic and day-trip visitors. Byron Bay is also well
established as an important component of international backpacker
itineraries. In 2007, it was estimated that 1.1 million tourists visited the
destination (Tourism Research Australia, 2008). In contrast to these high
tourist visitation numbers, the population of Byron Shire is 28,761 of
which there are 5,609 residents within the township of Byron Bay and
nearby surrounds (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2006).
Tourism activity and development activity within the shire, and in
particular Byron Bay, has increased rapidly since the 1980s. At the same
time other industrial activity in the area has declined. Tourism is therefore
recognised an important contributor to the shire’s economic development.
In addition to the pressures of tourism growth, Byron Shire experienced
one of the highest population growth rates in New South Wales (NSW)
from 1981 to 2001, 3.52 per cent per annum. For the 2001 to 2006 period
this has slowed to 0.05 per cent per annum. In 1991, the National Parks
and Wildlife Service had warned that the rate of population growth had
already outpaced the development of supporting physical infrastructure
and human services in Byron Bay (NSW Department of Planning 1993,
cited by Essex & Brown, 1997).
The increased popularity of Byron Bay as a domestic and international
tourist destination over the past decade, coupled with its attractiveness as
a sea change locality, has placed strains on the town’s infrastructure and
service facilities and there has been increased concern from residents about
the impacts of tourism activity. Lack of planning for infrastructure and
public facilities has resulted in an inadequate capacity of the sewage
treatment works, traffic congestion and insufficient parking facilities within
the Byron Bay central business district. These problems are explained by
Westerhausen and MacBeth (2003, p. 77) as:
evolving as a result of external pressure placed on a very small

community that has operated in an unregulated environment, without
significant community consultation and an eager pro-development
council that continued to approve development far beyond the capacity
of the shire’s existing tourism infrastructure.
Although Byron Shire Council (BSC) has developed sustainable develop-

ment policies in many areas, there has not been a coherent tourism strategy
formulated since 1988 (Westerhausen & Macbeth, 2003). The impact of
tourism activity at peak times is considered to be extreme and requires
remedial measures to ameliorate its effects (Westerhausen & Macbeth,
2003). Consultants commissioned by the NSW state tourism authority,
Tourism New South Wales (TNSW), to prepare a tourism management
options paper for Byron Shire Council in 2002, warned:
It is our independent opinion that the current trends in Byron, in

particular the significant and continuing increases in visitor levels
focusing on the Byron Bay township, are unsustainable and will lead
to compromising the social, economic and environmental qualities of
the town.
(Tonge, Fletcher & Concept Tourism Consultants, 2002)
It has been suggested that there is a need for ongoing cooperation

between the community and tourism industries in order to maximise the
benefits and to minimise the impacts of tourism (Westerhausen &
Macbeth, 2003). There is therefore a real need to develop critical under-
standings of this complex destination system in order to improve tourism
planning and management, and to develop more sustainable forms of
tourism in the future.
This part of the chapter presents a case analysis of the policy and destina-
tion management system that pertains to the popular Australian destina-
tion in Byron Bay by exploring the roles, activities and interactions of the
various institutional stakeholders involved in policy decision making and
destination management for the destination from 1988 to 2005 as inter-
preted by participants in this study. Discussion throughout the case study
144 M. Lawrence
analysis integrates concepts derived from policy network theories. It should
be noted that due to word space restrictions only an overview of the roles
of principal stakeholders is presented.
Roles of principal stakeholders and destination management

system
Here, the roles, activities and interactions of the principal institutional
stakeholders involved in the system from 1988 to 2005 are traced and
explored.
Byron Shire Council

At a local government level, BSC initially collaborated with the Tourism
Commission NSW to develop a tourism strategy for Byron Shire in 1988.
The Council employed a strategic marketing manager to implement recom-
mendations arising from the strategy in 1989. A change in Council in 1990
resulted in this position being rescinded and the strategy was shelved. This
Council, however, continued to fund and manage visitor information ser
vices for the destination. Decisions made by this Council and its adminis-
tration from 1990 to 1995 have severely constrained subsequent Councils’
ability to fund infrastructure and service facilities within the destination.
As a result of these financial constraints, the Council elected in 1995 made
a decision to withdraw funding for the operation of the Byron Bay Tourist
Information Centre in 1996. Another significant decision by Council at
this time that affected future tourism development was a decision to place
a moratorium on all new medium-density development in 1995 until a new
sewage treatment plant could be developed.
Changes to the Local Government Act 1993 NSW in 1997 required
councils to develop a number of strategies that adopted ecologically sustain-
able development planning principles. From 1998, BSC demonstrated an
interest in dealing with tourism pressures for the destination demonstrated
by its commission of a Tourism Capacity Study in 1998. This strategy was,
however, criticised for its focus on tourism accommodation. In 2000,
Mayor Wilson formed an informal network comprising representatives
from the state tourism organisation, TNSW, the Department of State and
Regional Development (DSRD), BSC and Byron and Brunswick Head
tourism associations who began to meet on a regular basis to discuss how
tourism planning could be progressed for Byron Shire. An opportunity
arose to apply for funding for tourism planning through the Australian
Government Regional Tourism Program in 2001. An application was sub-
mitted, but the ‘executive core’ (Homeshaw, 1995) of Council demon-
strated indifference to tourism policy by its decision not to provide financial
support for this application process. The application was rejected at a
federal level because it lacked commitment of Council and the community.
Following the rejection of this application, a decision was made by
Council to collaborate with TNSW to develop a Tourism Management
Options Paper in 2002. This action was applauded by participants to this
study as a trigger point for Council to begin dealing with some of the
tourism management issues confronting the shire. From 2002, there has
also been a significant drive by Council to review land-use planning instru-
ments for the destination, as a result of changes to the state planning
system in 2000. Participants to this study acknowledged that Council LEP
mechanisms provided a statutory framework in which tourism planning
could well be placed.
Other tourism management issues have also appeared on Council
agenda since this time. For example, the issue of holiday letting of proper-
ties in residential areas has also been on the Council agenda since February
2003 in response to calls from the community to address this issue. Other
infrastructure issues such as sewage, parking and traffic management also
appear on Council agendas. Council has also made a commitment of
$72,000 in 2006 to assist with the development of a tourism management
plan for the shire that will provide strategies for the future development,
marketing and management of the destination. It has, however, been the
influence of Mayor Wilson (1999 to 2004) and Mayor Barham (Deputy
Mayor 1999 to 2004 and Mayor from 2004) that have driven tourism
planning and management at a local government level.
On reflecting on the role of BSC in tourism policy and destination man-
agement, participants to this study highlighted a number of factors that
had contributed to Council’s indifferent attitude to tourism planning
including: political tensions within the council executive between Green
and conservative councillors, lack of strategic vision for tourism, lack of
tourism planning expertise and knowledge of Council land-use planners,
and the dominant focus on strategic land-use planning for the shire.
Tourism New South Wales (TNSW)

From a state perspective, the state tourism organisation, TNSW, demon-
strated substantive action in the development of a tourism strategy for
Byron Shire in 1988 under the neo-liberalist economic ideology that pre-
vailed at that time (Dredge, 2001). During the 1990s, TNSW was mainly
marketing orientated and initiated an aggressive cooperative marketing
campaign that promoted Byron Bay and the Northern Rivers region in
1996 and 1997. This campaign was considered by some participants to
this study as a trigger point for ongoing conflict and tension between
TNSW and the Byron Bay community.
From 2000, a shift in the role of the organisation was identified, with
TNSW advocating the need for partnerships with local governments
to develop destination plans and a whole of government approach to
achieve ecologically sustainable tourism in addition to their marketing role.
146 M. Lawrence
In 2001, TNSW policy and planning staff worked with BSC, DSRD and
BSTA (Byron Shire Tourism Association) representatives to develop an
application to the Regional Tourism Program to access federal government
funding for tourism planning for Byron Shire. Following rejection of this
application at a federal level, TNSW continued to demonstrate sustained
commitment to progressing tourism planning and management initiatives
for Byron Shire, with the contribution of funding to develop a Tourism
Management Options Paper in 2001. The NSW Tourism Minister,
however, retained the ‘locus of control’ (Dredge, 2004) with regards to
TNSW involvement at a destination level, demonstrated by an extended
delay in the release of the Options Paper to Council in 2003.
A change in leadership of TNSW in 2003 was acknowledged by some
participants in this study as initiating renewed interest in the recognition of
community needs and addressing tourism planning and management at
regional and destination levels. This leadership change coincided with the
incorporation of the organisation into the NSW Department of Sport,
Recreation and Tourism in 2003. In 2004, TNSW again demonstrated a
commitment to progressing tourism planning and management initiatives
for the shire when the organisation collaborated with the Northern Rivers
Regional Development Board (DRRDB) and Nothern Rivers Tourism
(NRT) in the revitalisation process of the local tourism assocation.
Northern Rivers Regional Development Board

From a regional perspective, The NRRDB has been an important stake-
holder in providing expertise and driving strategic planning initiatives for
the Far North Coast at a regional level from 1994. The board, through its
Chair, was acknowledged by participants to this study as influential in
driving tourism planning and management initiatives for the Byron Bay
system from 2001. The board has strong links with DSRD and NRT.
Northern Rivers Tourism

From its conception in 1994, the regional tourism organisation, NRT, has
been largely indifferent to tourism policy and destination management
issues for Byron Bay and has been primarily focused on project-based,
cooperative marketing initiatives for the Northern Rivers region. In 2004,
NRT acted in a facilitation role in collaboration with other stakeholders
that resulted in the formation of a new local tourism association, Tourism
Byron. The organisation was, however, criticised by participants to the
study for its lack of leadership and inability to engage with the larger and
more influential tourism operations. TNSW has had a strong influence over
this organisation given its role as NRT’s prime funding source. Its connec-
tions with BSC can be considered particularly weak, and it has only
recently begun to foster better links with tourism operations in Byron Bay.
Department of State and Regional Development
The state department for regional development, DSRD, has also been mainly
indifferent towards tourism policy and planning for Byron Bay. The role of
the department has been to provide funding assistance and advice to project-
based business initiatives within the region. Participants to the study acknow-
ledged that DSRD regional personnel had an awareness of issues pertinent to
the destination, but had only actively contributed to tourism planning and
management for Byron Shire in the RTP (Regional Tourism Program) appli-
cation process in 2001. The department has well-developed links with other
institutional stakeholders at regional and state level.
Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources

From 1988 to 1997, the role of the state planning department towards
tourism policy and planning for Byron Bay can be regarded as indifferent.
During this time the ‘locus of control’ (Dredge, 2004) in relation to land-
use planning approvals was determined at a local government level. From
1997, the department began to assume the ‘locus of control’ with regard to
land-use planning and development with the establishment of the NSW
Coastal Policy in 1997 and land-use planning legislative reforms from
2000. The NSW Minister for Planning has further assumed the locus of
control with regard to decision making for tourism development activity
provided by SEPP71 legislation that was introduced in 2002.
Nature of relational ties and network dynamics

Whilst some level of communication exists between these stakeholders in
the wider policy community, the core relational ties with regards to
tourism policy, planning and destination management for Byron Bay are
shown in Figure 11.1.
As demonstrated in Figure 11.1, stakeholders function within two rela-
tively disparate policy and management frameworks, those involved in (1)
land-use planning and (2) tourism product development, marketing and
planning. Overriding both these planning subsystems is other state legisla-
tion, in particular the Local Government Act NSW 1997 that provides
local government a degree of flexibility to make decisions at a destination
level in terms of services and regulations.
In terms of the land-use planning system, there is an established state
legislative hierarchical framework that guides planning for tourism devel-
opment activity that is embedded with rules and a formal planning code
and culture. Inclusion in this system is strictly limited to local government
and the state government Planning Department and its regional offices.
This system has, however, been under review since 2000, and this has had
a distributive impact on land-use planning at the destination level. It is
evident that the State Planning Minister has the ‘locus of control’ (Dredge,
148 M. Lawrence
Land use planning policy subsystem Tourism product development, marketing

and planning policy subsystem
Local government policy framework
Institutional space within which Institutional space

tourism product development State level within which tourism
marketing and planning occurs product development
DSRD* marketing and
planning occurs
DIPNR* Regional level
NRRDB
TNSW*
Destination level
NRT
Byron
Shire
Council
NPWS*
‘Collaborative’ planning
issue networks on selected
planning processes and
issues
Other actors and agencies Other actors and agencies

not in active participation not in active participation
Key:
BSC Byron Shire Council
DIPNR Dept. Infrastructure
Planning and Natural Resources
DSRD Dept. State and Regional
Development
NRRDB Northern Rivers Regional
Development Board
NPWS National Parks and Wildlife
Service
NRT Northern Rivers Tourism
TNSW Tourism New South Wales
Strong link
Weaker link
Boundary of policy subsystem
Figure 11.1 Nature of relational ties: the Byron Bay planning and destination man-
agement system (source: adapted from Dredge, 2006b).
Note
* At regional and state levels.
2004) in relation to decision making for land-use planning through state

environmental legislation for significant coastal developments, and
approval of Regional Environment Plans (REP) and Local Environment
Plans (LEP). Local government has some decision-making capacity through
its LEP and Development Control planning instruments. ‘Tension and dif-
ference’ (Dredge, 2006a) has been apparent between the state department
and BSC in a battle for the ‘locus of control’ (Dredge, 2004) with regards
to decisionmaking for the destination.
Planning, marketing and management for tourism activity, other than
for land use are undertaken by other institutional stakeholders that func-
tion in a relatively non-statutory planning environment. The roles of these
stakeholders with regard to tourism policy and destination management
are not, however, clearly defined. During the 1990s, there has been no sus-
tained active commitment of any stakeholder to progress tourism policy
and planning processes for Byron Bay. Rather, marketing activities have
been a core focus of stakeholder activity during this time. It is further
apparent that there was an obvious crisis point in the mid 1990s when BSC
experienced considerable management and financial constraints.
Evidence of collaboration and interaction between institutionalised
stakeholders to address tourism planning and management issues within
this policy subsystem has only been apparent since 2001. Since this time,
stakeholder groups active within the system are beginning to start the col-
laborative process of sharing worldviews and a commitment to goals, and
are beginning to find a common platform on which to ‘negotiate and com-
promise’ (Dredge, 2006a). The state Tourism Minister still, however,
retains the ‘locus of control’ (Dredge, 2004) over the involvement of
TNSW in destination level tourism planning and marketing.
Given the presence of BSC in both planning and policy frameworks, the
Council could assume a significant role in the coordination of tourism
product development, marketing and planning, in addition to its strategic
planning activities related to land use and development. Participants to this
study have suggested that the LEP is a legislative tool in which tourism
planning can be situated, but BSC may lack the expertise and knowledge
to effectively guide the future of strategic tourism policy and planning
processes. The appointment of Southern Cross University by BSC in 2007
to develop a Tourism Management Plan for Byron Shire demonstrates
Council’s developing leadership role.
As demonstrated in this institutional analysis, local government needs
assistance from stakeholders with strategic tourism knowledge and exper-
tise to contribute to planning for specific destination contexts. This analy-
sis has further highlighted the need for coordination across state, regional
and local levels of sub-government agencies and authorities. There is also a
real need to link the land-use planning policy subsystem with that of the
tourism product development, marketing and planning subsystem. As Hall
(1999) recommends, there is a need for coordination for tourism both hor-
izontally, e.g. between different agencies that may have responsibilities for
various tourism related activities at the same level of governance, and ver-
tically. Rather than this occurring at a state or regional level, there is an
opportunity for consideration of this coordination to be developed at a
destination level. A quote made by the Deputy General of the WTO at the
WTO international seminar in Budapest in 1993 with a theme of ‘Tourism
Development and the Responsibility of the State’ aptly applies to all levels
of sub-governments active within the Byron Bay policy and planning
150 M. Lawrence
system: ‘The great difficulty with which we are confronted is that, for
tourism, the state must know at once how to be present when necessary
and how to withdraw when it’s obligatory’ (cited by Jeffries, 2001, p.
113). While this chapter cannot provide prescriptive solutions for the
development of policy, planning and management for other destinations, it
can draw on the empirical findings to identify a set of factors that may
inform future policy, planning and destination management processes.
Factors that may be considered are:
• Locus of control. This case has highlighted the importance of centre–

local institutional relations (Yuksel et al., 1999). Rather than adopting
a top-down tourism planning and management approach, local gov-
ernment in NSW is well positioned to assume the ‘locus of control’
(Dredge, 2004) in relation to decision making for planning, marketing
and management of tourism activity and development within a desti-
nation region.
• Need for a strategic vision. There is a need to develop a strategic vision
for tourism activity and development at a destination level that com-
bines understandings of past and current and future circumstances.
This strategic process should foster engagement with government,
corporate and community stakeholders both from land-use planning
and from tourism product development, marketing and planning
subsystems.
• Incremental and adaptive planning. Following the establishment of
strategic vision for tourism activity and development for a destination,
further planning and policy processes should be incremental and
organised around a number of notional stages to address priority
issues faced by destination and to facilitate administration and man-
agement of each stage.
• Importance of statutory framework for tourism policy and destination
management. Development of a strategic vision needs to be linked to a
statutory framework to ensure that the vision is transferred across suc-
cessive government executives and administrations and that there is an
implementation process for tourism policy. Although there is no statu-
tory framework that specifically provides for tourism planning and
management, LEP planning and DCP (Development Control Plan)
mechanisms currently provide local government with statutory control
and regulatory mechanisms that may be used to achieve sustainable
tourism development including: preservation of low-scale develop-
ment, planning and regulation of zones for tourism activity and devel-
opment, and protection of environmentally significant sites.
• Improved communication and coordination across institutional
boundaries. According to Hall (2000, p. 82) ‘the need for coordination
only becomes apparent when it is not occurring’. This case study has
identified a need for improved communication and coordination across
and between institutional stakeholders involved in the land-use plan-
ning system and those involved in the tourism product development,
marketing and planning subsystem As Jenkins (2000, p. 195) contends,
‘the most effective solutions to regional problems do not rest in the
remote offices of government departments but in the ideas, entrepre-
neurship and cooperation of regional people and their organisations’.
Furthermore, this case study has shown that analysis of tourism policy
and planning processes requires the analyst to step beyond a single issue or
sector to develop an appreciation of the multilayers, cross-sectoral issues
that characterise tourism (Lawrence & Dredge, 2007). In addition, this
study has demonstrated interrelated conceptions of the attributes of a par-
ticular place with the socio-political processes that have shaped the devel-
opment and implementation of policies (Hall, 2000).

This chapter has used concepts derived from policy network theories to
examine the roles and interactions of institutional stakeholders engaged in
tourism policy and destination management decision making for the desti-
nation of Byron Bay from 1988 to 2005. It was found that these stake-
holders function in two separate policy subsystems: that of land-use
planning, and what has been termed the tourism product development,
marketing and planning subsystem. The former subsystem has an estab-
lished hierarchical system that is restricted to processes and issues associ-
ated with land-use planning for NSW. The latter subsystem is fragmented
and lacks clearly defined roles and responsibilities in relation to tourism
policy, planning, marketing and management. Located at the core of these
subsystems is local government.
Review of the actions of principal stakeholders during this time has
shown that there was no sustained commitment of any stakeholder to the
Byron Bay policy and destination management system during the 1990s.
Activity during this time was largely marketing orientated and little stake-
holder collaboration occurred. These actors were found to move in and
out of the policy and planning arena depending on the nature and per-
ceived importance of particular policy, planning and destination manage-
ment issues at the time. There has, however, been a shift in the role of
stakeholders from 2001 to work collaboratively to progress tourism policy
and planning for the destination region. There is a need to establish a stra-
tegic vision and planning for tourism activity for the destination. There is
also a need for improved communication and coordination across state,
regional and local institutional boundaries to improve tourism policy,
planning, marketing and management.
152 M. Lawrence
References
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). Census of population and housing, basic com-
munity profile: Byron (A) (LGA 11350), Catalogue No. 2001.0. Canberra: ABS.
Burstein, P. (1991). Policy domains: Organisation, culture, and policy outcomes.
Annual Review of Society, 17, 327–350.
Considine, M. (1994). Public policy: A critical approach. South Melbourne: Mac-
millan Education Australia Pty Ltd.
Dredge, D. (2001). Worker’s paradise to leisure lifestyle: Cultural and organisa-
tional dimensions of tourism planning and policy networks in Lake Macquarie,
New South Wales, Australia. PhD Thesis, University of Newcastle, New South
Wales, Australia.
Dredge, D. (2003). Networks, local governance and tourism policy: Local tourism
associations under the microscope. Southern Cross University, Lismore, Australia.
Dredge, D. (2004). Networks, conflict and collaborative tourism planning. In C.
Cooper, C. C. Arcodia, D. Solnet & M. Whitford (Eds.), CAUTHE 2004: Creat-
ing Tourism Knowledge. CD-ROM proceedings of the Council for Australian
University Tourism and Hospitality Education (CAUTHE) Conference. Brisbane:
University of Queensland.
Dredge, D. (2006a). Networks, conflict and collaborative communities. Journal of
Dredge, D. (2006b) Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism. Tourism
Management, 27, 269–280.
Essex, S. & Brown, G. (1997). The emergence of post-suburban landscapes on the
north coast of New South Wales: A case study of contested space. International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 21(2), 259–285.
Hall, C. M. (1999). Rethinking collaboration and partnership: A public policy per-
spective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3&4), 274–289.
Hall, C. M. (2000). Tourism planning, policies, processes and relationships.
Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Hall, C. M. & Jenkins, J. (2004). Tourism and public policy. In A. Lew, C. M.
Hall & A. M. Williams (Eds.), A companion to tourism (pp. 525–540). Malden,
MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Homeshaw, J. (1995). Policy community, policy networks and science policy in
Australia. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 54(4), 520–532.
Howlett, M. & Ramesh, M. (1995). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and
policy sub-systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jeffries, D. (2001). Governments and tourism. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Jenkins, J. (2000). The dynamics of regional tourism organisations in New South
Wales, Australia: History, structures and operations. Current Issues in Tourism,
3(3), 175–201.
Kerr, W. R. K. (2003). Tourism, public policy, and the strategic management of
failure. Stirling: Elsevier.
Lawrence, M. & Dredge, D. (2007). Tourism planning and policy processes. In D.
Dredge & J. Jenkins (Eds.), Tourism planning and policy (pp. 191–224). Milton:
John Wiley.
Klijn, E.-H. (1996). Analyzing and managing policy processes in complex net-
works: A theoretical examination of the concept policy network and its prob-
lems. Administration and Society, 28(1), 90–119.
Marsh, D. (1998). Comparing policy networks. Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Milward, H. B. & Wamsley, G. L. (1984). Policy subsystems, networks and the
tools of public management. In R. Eyestone (Ed.), Policy implementation in
federal and unitary systems (pp. 3–25). Greenwich: JAI Press.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). From marketisation to diplomacy: It’s the mix that
matters. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 56(2), 40–53.
Richins, H. & Pearce, P. (2000). Influences on tourism development decision
making: Coastal local government areas in eastern Australia. Journal of Sustain-
able Tourism, 8(3), 207–225.
Rowley, T. J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder
influences. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 887–910.
Stevenson, W. & Greenberg, D. (2000). Agency and social networks: Strategies of
action in a social structure of position, opposition, and opportunity. Administra-
tive Science Quarterly, 45(4), 651.
Tonge, R., Fletcher, S. & Concept Tourism Consultants. (2002). Byron shire
tourism management: An options paper for consideration (Final Draft). Prepared
for Byron Shire Council and Tourism NSW.
Tourism Research Australia. (2008). National visitor survey and international
visitor survey. Canberra: Tourism Research Australia.
Tyler, D. & Dinan, C. (2001). The role of interested groups in England’s emerging
tourism policy network. Current Issues in Tourism, 4(2–4), 210–252.
Van Waarden, F. (1992). The historical institutionalisation of typical national pat-
terns in policy networks between state and industry: A comparison of the USA
and Netherlands. European Journal of Political Research, 21(102), 131–162.
Westerhausen, K. & Macbeth, J. (2003). Backpackers and empowered local com-
munities: Natural allies in the struggle for sustainability and local control.
Tourism Geographies, 5(1), 71–86.
Yuksel, F., Bramwell, B. & Yuksel, A. (1999). Stakeholder interviews and tourism
planning at Pamukkale, Turkey. Tourism Management, 20, 351–360.
Part IV
Vacation decision making

and choice
12 Influence of women’s lifestyles on
holiday decisions
Mª José Barlés, Rafael Bravo and Elena Fraj
Introduction
The tourism industry is an essential element in the Spanish economy,
reaching 11 per cent of the GDP in 2005 (National Statistical Institute,
INE 2005). According to the Centre of Sociological Research (2005), in
Spain most leisure trips are family related, which makes this institution a
fundamental field of research. New types of tourism (rural, sports, cultural,
adventure, etc.) are going from strength to strength as a response to new
consumer lifestyles. In this sense, Scott and Parfitt (2004) state, “recrea-
tional trips and leisure activities have always been lifestyle choices and are
becoming lifestyle purchase”.
In an academic context, those facts are also reflected in new research
lines. Researchers are considering new psychographic variables to under-
stand tourist behaviour (Bigné, Andreu & Gnoth, 2005). Destination
image, satisfaction and quality are common issues in tourism purchase
(Bigné, Sánchez & Sánchez, 2001; Chen & Tsai, 2007). From a marketing
perspective, lifestyles are seen as a way of understanding how people
choose tourism services (Thyne & Laws, 2005). Consequently, it is of
interest to find the relationships between holiday decisions and the
lifestyles of those who make them. A revision of the literature reveals
that the 1980s saw a profusion of studies related to the role of women
in the family holiday decision-making process. Nevertheless, despite
the evident relationship between lifestyles and tourism consumption, there
is a lack of literature that separately analyses the role of such variables
among women. The present study aims to bridge that gap. More specifi-
cally, we will analyse the influence of lifestyles on women’s role in holiday
decisions.
If such a relationship is confirmed, tourism companies will be able to
improve their communication programmes, since they will know which
specific decisions are made by women and to which lifestyle they can
address their promotion actions, being the receivers part of their target
public. The findings have a remarkable relevance for the sector managers,
as they will obtain added value through the contribution of their services.
158 M. J. Barlés et al.
This will increase tourists’ satisfaction and trigger their return to the desti-
nation and their positive recommendation to relatives and friends.
Influence of women’s lifestyle on holiday decisions

Although the family decision-making study began at the end of the 1950s
until the 1970s, it was difficult to find research focused on the role that
each family member played in such a process. Some authors studied the
decision process itself more than the purchase result (Davis, 1976; Nelson,
1988; Spiro, 1983), and analysed each member’s influence within the
couple in some sub-decisions (Davis & Rigaux, 1974; Shuptrine & Samu-
elson, 1976). Further, changes in the family decision-making process are
also considered and, so, researchers included variables such as the number
of children, the economic resources distribution and the family culture
(Cohen & Kaufman, 1991; Ford, LaTour & Henthorne, 1995; Pahl, 1995;
Vogler & Pahl, 1993) as the main motivators of such changes. Also, the
family structure (high and low cohesion) has a relevant impact in vacation
decisions (Ndubisi, 2007).
Within the tourism context, Myers and Moncrief (1978) were the first
that studied the family decision making. They found that joint decisions
were more frequent in young couples. Besides, women influence more than
men in families with scarce economic resources. In the last years, this topic
is reaching a great interest in this industry in which most of decisions are
taken jointly, though the relevance of each member in the couple can vary
for different vacation sub-decisions (Kang & Hsu, 2005; Kang, Hsu &
Wolfe, 2003; Nanda, Hu & Bai, 2006).
Most decisions that we take as tourists are not independent but complex
decisions that entail choosing multiple interrelated elements in a temporal
sequence (Dellaert, Ettema & Lindh, 1998). Three stages can be identified
in this process: the decision to travel, the decisions before the trip and the
decisions during the trip. The decisions before the trip are related to
accommodation, travel agency, transport, season and duration (Fesen-
maier, 1995). During the holiday, the decisions include attractions or
special places to visit, routes, expenses, places to eat or rest, etc. (Dellaert
et al., 1998). A similar classification is offered by Zalatan (1998), who dis-
tinguishes four decision categories: “initial” tasks, “financing”, “pre-
departure” and “destination”. Although the grouping can be different, the
decisions are basically the same.
In the 1970s and 1980s, holiday decisions were jointly made by men
and women (Myers & Moncrieft, 1978; Richie & Filiatrault, 1980), but
there was a male predominance. However, more recent works have
observed that the trend is changing and now women adopt a more active
role in information search and evaluation, accommodation and purchases
(Kang et at., 2003; Litvin, Xu & Kang, 2004; Wang, Hsieh, Yehy & Tsai,
2004). Therefore, women seem to prevail in pre-holiday decisions. In this
Women’s lifestyles on holiday decisions 159
line, Mottiar and Quinn (2004) conducted an exploratory study that also
concluded that women have a dominant role in previous stages of the vaca-
tion decisions process.
The concept of lifestyle, from a marketing perspective, was introduced in
1963 by William Lazer, who defined it as “a characteristic way of life in its
broadest sense . . . it embodies the patterns that develop and emerge from the
dynamics of living in a society”. Two main marketing tendencies can be dif-
ferentiated, socio-cultural (Yankelovich, 1981a, b) and psychographic cur-
rents. Among the latter, three sub-currents are distinguished: “centres of
interest” (Agostini & Boss, 1972), “activities, interests and opinions” (AIO)
(Calvi, 1982; Mitchell, 1983) and “purchased products” (Shields, 1992).
Nowadays, in a society in which differences by age, sex or social class
are mixed, the lifestyle classification and emotional messages are the new
key for advertising agency in order to catch the current consumer (Juan,
1994). Lifestyles have been mostly used to segment the tourism market.
Lawson (1991) conducted a comparative segmentation study between
tourism general (AIO) and specific lifestyles. Mazanec and Zins (1994)
proposed a grouping of tourists based on a set of reasons and travel activ-
ities according to the Euro-styles typology. In addition, Silverberg,
Backman and Backman (1996) segmented the market through lifestyles
according to the type of destination. Plummer (1974) suggested some life-
style dimensions that would be further modified by González (1998) to
adapt them to the Spanish market. González, Bello and Muñiz (2000)
proved their utility, obtaining five groups differentiated by lifestyles and
values rather than by their economic and socio-demographic character-
istics. González (2005) delved into this criterion proving its explanatory
value for tourism behaviour, and when applied to cultural tourism, the
AIO construct proved to be optimum for tourism segmentation. This meth-
odology was developed by Wind (1978) and it was integrated by variables
related to behavioural analysis, which give an individual worldwide vision.
In a wide leisure-related context, the interest to examine people’s activ-
ities and preferences arose in the late 1970s (Bryan, 2000). In the tourism
context, Van Raaij and Francken (1984) suggested that lifestyles could
explain the behaviour in the holiday decision-making process. Con-
sequently, this psychographic variable could determine the choice of
holiday activities (Pennington-Gray, Fridgen & Stynes, 2003), as well as
the final destination and perceived satisfaction (Naylor & Bardi, 2002).
Thus, some studies see lifestyle as a moderator variable of the consumer’s
satisfaction and loyalty to the destiny (Matzler, Füller & Faullant, 2007).
All the information on lifestyles that can be gathered by professionals
will obviously facilitate the design and quality of tourism programmes that
best fit to customer’s needs (Gilbert & Warren, 1995; Vyncke, 2002).
So far, the most widely used methodology in tourism-related studies has
been AIO, although its relationship with holiday decisions made by women
has not been addressed in the literature yet. Nevertheless, we believe that
the fact that it has proved to be useful for tourism segmentation may be
more than a solid argument to study such a relationship. Hence, we are
interested in knowing which lifestyles influence those decisions (Figure
12.1). Consequently, we establish that certain activities, interests and opin-
ions are more likely to lead women to make pre-holiday decisions
(information search, place, accommodation, boarding, etc.), as well as
decisions during the holiday (activities, shopping, places to visit, etc.).
According to the previous literature, we hypothesise:
Hypothesis 1: Lifestyles influence the role of women in vacation

decisions.
More specifically, as mentioned above, lifestyle can be analysed through

activities, interests and opinions. Therefore, we establish the following
hypotheses that stem from the first one:
Hypothesis 2: Women’s activities will influence in their role in vaca-

tion decisions.
Hypothesis 3: Women’s interests will influence in their role in vaca-

tion decisions.
Hypothesis 4: Women’s opinions will influence in their role in vaca-

tion decisions.
Methodology
Along the last trimester of 2006, a questionnaire was designed and passed
to a convenience sample of women who were married or living with a
partner. Of these, 328 surveys were responded and 300 were valid (42.9
per cent). Prior to the design of the survey, two pre-tests were conducted in
order to avoid certain problems. The survey was divided into three parts.
The first gathered questions on the influence of the couple on product and
service purchase decisions (holiday decisions) and persuasion tactics. The
second included questions on women’s lifestyles. Finally, the third con-
sisted of some socio-economic and demographic questions. The sample
description is displayed in Table 12.1.
Woman’s lifestyles: Vacation decisions:

Activities Pre- and during
Interests holidays
Opinions
Figure 12.1 Proposed model.

Table 12.1 Sample profile of the survey
Socio-demographic variables Frequency Percentage

(N = 300) (%)
Working out of home

Yes 261 86.9
No 39 13.1
Age
Less than 30 41 13.7
31–45 181 60.3
46–60 67 22.3
Over 60 11 3.7
Level of studies
Without studies 2 0.7
Primary School 34 11.4
Secondary School 99 33.0
University or above 165 54.9
Level of personal income (euros)
Less than 1,000 79 26.3
1,001–2,000 179 59.6
2,001–3,000 37 12.2
3,001–4,000 3 1.2
Over 4,000 2 0.8
Occupation
Employee 143 47.6
Own business 26 8.4
Professional 3 1.0
Business woman 9 3.0
Civil servant 70 23.3
Other 10 3.4
Children
Yes 204 68
No 96 32
Note
N refers to the sample size.
The variables considered in this study are divided into two types: the
ones that consider holiday decisions (endogenous) and those that define
women’s lifestyle (exogenous). In our case, considering the revision of the
literature and the peculiar characteristics of family holidays in Spain, we
decided to include the following sub-decisions: fixing holiday dates, dura-
tion, budget, information search, destination, accommodation, board
accommodation, ticket purchase, packing, places to eat, places to visit and
activities to do at the destination.
A 5-point Likert scale was employed, where 1 corresponded to “a
totally male decision” and 5 to “a totally female decision”. On the other
hand, lifestyles were measured through the AIO scale developed by
González (1998) for the Spanish case, from Plummer’s work (1974).
González (1998) carried out a qualitative validation of this scale through
several expert interviews and meeting groups. In the questionnaire, the
AIO scale collects three concepts (activities, interests and opinions) by
means of five questions. On the one hand, the activities subscale is meas-
ured by two questions. The first collects different hobbies and women’s
likings such as listening to music, shopping, sightseeing, going out at
nights, going to the cinema, theatres, museums and doing physical exer-
cises. The second gathered women’s fondness by several TV and radio pro-
grammes. On the other hand, the interests and opinions subscales are
measured through three questions referring to diverse global aspects:
society, work, justice, family, friends, life, fashion, etc. All the variables
were measured through a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 corresponded to
“unimportant” and 5 to “very important” for activities items, and for
interests and opinions items, 1 corresponded to “completely disagree” and
5 to “completely agree”.
The cultural environment in Spain is not the same as in the USA and since
an American scale was used in our study, it was considered to validate it.
Hence several principal exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were
conducted. Following the exploratory and confirmatory analyses, the “fit”
of the proposed model outlined in Figure 12.1 was tested using the EQS
6.1v. statistical program. Results from these analyses produced seven
factors.
In the holiday decisions scale, items were grouped into two dimensions.
The first one consisted of five items related to decisions before holiday
(DBD) (destination, accommodation, travelling, etc.), and the second one
gathered two items referred to decisions made during holidays (DDH)
(shopping, sightseeing, activities to do, etc.). These two constructs were
our dependent variables.
Regarding AIO scale, we obtained five factors that acted as independent
variables in the structural equation modelling analysis. For the activities
subscale the analysis provided three dimensions. The first one is called
“cultural outdoor activities” (COA), which gathered three items on
women’s outdoor hobbies (cinema, concerts, dancing, sightseeing). The
second and third dimensions collected women’s likings by documentaries
(DP) and debates (D) on TV and radio, respectively. And, for the interest
and opinion subscale, items assembled in two factors. The first dimension
gathered five items on women’s interest and opinion about professional
success (PIO), and the second one included two items on women’s interest
and opinion about social justice (SJIO) (Table 12.2).
Results from these analyses corroborate that data fitted well with the
proposed model and justified the existence of such dimensions (Bagozzi &
Table 12.2 Confirmatory factor analysis and final reliability
Variables (items) Standardised Cronbach’s Composite Extracted

factor loadings (t) alpha reliability variance
Decisions before holidays (DBH) 0.768 0.746 0.371

Seeking information for a 0.732* (16.725)
holiday
Deciding about 0.664* (9.799)
destination
Deciding about 0.660* (8.388)
accommodation
Deciding about boarding 0.655* (7.560)
accommodation
Buying tickets/holiday 0.602* (10.070)
Decisions during holidays (DDH) 0.713 0.626 0.455
Places to visit 0.740* (10.220)
Activities to do 0.752* (9.844)
Cultural outdoor activities (COA) 0.793 0.730 0.480
Going to the cinema 0.612* (10.965)
Visiting exhibitions/ 0.896* (17.023)
monuments
Attending concerts, dance 0.754* (14.697)
and theatre
Keen on documentary programmes (DP) 0.689 0.689
Documentaries 0.920* (25.356)
Keen on debates (D) 0.683 0.683
Debates 0.923* (27.129)
Professional interest and opinion (PIO) 0.793 0.745 0.426
Having an exciting 0.719* (11.574)
occupation
Having professional 0.854* (14.174)
success
Creating something that 0.612* (10.179)
endures
Getting promotion as a 0.653* (11,964)
result of professional
recognition
Social justice interest and opinion (SJIO) 0.675 0.596 0.425
Having ideals and fighting 0.701* (10.086)
for a fairer society
Fighting injustice 0.733* (10.833)
Goodness of fit
χ2 = 303.3 d.f. = 116 p = 0.000; GFI = 0.90; CFI = 0.952; IFI = 0.952;
RMSEA = 0.073
There exist convergent and discriminant validity.
Note
Variables have been obtained from González (1998). This is a reduced version of the AIO
scale after the validation analysis was conducted.
Yi, 1988; Del Barrio & Luque, 2000). Moreover, convergent and discrimi-
nant validity was guaranteed (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). These factors
(DBH, DDH, COA, DP, D, PIO, SJIO) were used as input variables for the
structural equation analysis. All structural equation models were assessed
using the Robust Maximum Likelihood method.
Table 12.3 and Figure 12.2 show the results obtained in this analysis.
Regarding the first relationship between women’s activities and vacation
decisions, data indicate that only outdoor activities influence those
decisions that are taken before holidays. Moreover, women’s fondness for
some TV or radio programmes seems to have no influence on either pre-
holiday decisions or decisions made during the stay at the destination.
Therefore, hypothesis 2, which said that women’s activities would influ-
ence in their role in vacation decisions, would be partially confirmed.
The relationships between, first, women’s interests and vacation
decisions and, second, women’s opinions and vacation decisions are clearly
defined, as data specify. Thus, it is shown that women’s professional inter-
est and opinion determine the role they have in pre- and during holiday
decisions, as well as women’s interest and opinion about social justice have
shown to be the strongest determinant of these decisions. Therefore,
COA1
COA2 COA
H2
COA3 0.124*** R2 � 0.41
H2 DBH1
0.104 D1 0.77
DP1 DP H2 DBH2
H2 0.072
�0.074 DBH
DBH3
H2
D1 D 0.034 DBH4
H2
0.033 DBH5
PI01
H3 and H4
PI02 0.113** DDH1
DDH
PI03 PIO
H3 and H4 DDH2
0.15**
PI04 D2 0.63
H3 and H4
0.61* R2 � 0.61
SJI01 H3 and H4
SJIO 0.76*
SJI02
Figure 12.2 Results from the structural model.

Notes
The diagram shows estimated standardised path parameters. * significant at 1% level, ** at
5% level. DBH = decisions before holidays; DDH = decisions during holidays; COA = cultural
outdoor activities; DP = keen on documentary programmes; D = keen on debates; PIO = profes-
sional interest and opinion; SJIO = social justice interest and opinion.
Table 12.3 Path coefficients from the structural model
Hypotheses Standardized coefficients (t) Relationships
H2: COA  DBH 0.124 (1.813)*** Yes

H2: DP  DBH 0.072 (–0.972) –
H2: D  DBH 0.034 (0.486) –
H3 and H4: PIO  DBH 0.113 (2.098)** Yes
H3 and H4: SJIO  DBH 0.609 (5.25)* Yes
H2: COA  DDH 0.104 (1.468) –
H2: DP  DDH –0.074 (–0.943) –
H2: D  DDH 0.033 (0.441) –
H3 and H4: PIO  DDH 0.148 (2.364)** Yes
H3 and H4: SJIO  DDH 0.755 (5.648)* Yes
Goodness of fit
χ2 = 562.7 d.f. = 129 p = 0.000; CFI = 0.89; IFI = 0.89;
RMSEA = 0.10
Notes
* means it is significant at 1% level, ** at 5% level,*** at 10% level.
hypothesis 3, which affirmed that women’s interests would influence in

their role in vacation decisions, and hypothesis 4, which established that
women’s opinions would influence in their role in vacation decisions,
would be confirmed.
Considering all these results, we may conclude that hypothesis 1 would
be confirmed, overall, due to those lifestyles defined by women’s interests
and opinions and, only partially, defined by women’s activities. These
results are parallel with the previous literature, because it shows that
women’s role in the family decision making is growing. In this study,
within the tourism context, this role is specially relevant for the pre-holiday
decisions (Kang et al., 2003; Mottiar & Quinn, 2004). According with
these findings, it should be underlined that women who like cultural and
outdoor activities and who have interest and a positive opinion about
having professional success and getting a fairer society, are those who most
influence in vacation decisions.

The purpose of this work has been to analyse the influence of lifestyles on
women’s role in holiday decisions. Thus, the AIO scale, which has been
often used for tourism market segmenting (Wind, 1978; González et al.,
2000; González, 2005), but never for women’s decision making, has been
applied for the first time. Findings indicate that lifestyles influence in the
women’s role in vacation holidays. In particular, women who have a great
love of going to the cinema, to the theatre, dancing and also love sightsee-
ing are those who are more dominant to pre-holiday decisions. They are
who decide about destination, accommodation, purchasing the tickets, etc.
Further, results also highlight that women who seek success in their work,
wish to create something that endures and fight for a fairer society, are
those who likelier make both pre- and during holiday decisions (informa-
tion search, accommodation, ticket buying, places to visit and activities to
do at the destination).
This study has found two different psychographic profiles as consumer
of tourism. On the one hand, there is an independent woman who works
out of home and who has a great personal ambition. She likes to receive
the acknowledgement of her colleagues. Perhaps, a journey would be a
really nice prize for her successes and she would make all the arrange-
ments. On the other hand, there is an altruistic and idealistic woman, who
is more concerned about the safety of society than about herself. She would
work in order to get a better world and would not expect to receive a
reward for it. In this case, adventurous journeys and also journeys that
support some social cause would be a really interesting alternative for her.
Following the Sex Role Orientation philosophy (SRO), these women
would belong to a modern and liberal couple, whose roles are flexible and
not defined. In this case, women and men’s conduct are not predictable
and, it is observed, that the women’s influence increases whereas the men’s
diminishes (Bailey, 1998; Webster & Reiss, 2001).
These findings facilitate a better knowledge of tourism demand. There-
fore, the image of the destination should gather these aspects to make it
more attractive for this group. Since women with that profile usually
decide about the holiday destination, the message should be addressed to
them. Having all this information, tourism industry suppliers could add
value to satisfy the final customer and encourage them to return.
Finally, we have to indicate that the results obtained must be interpreted
in the context where they have been applied, thus the sample is representa-
tive of the tourism industry in a particular Spanish county. In this respect,
our aim in further research intends to expand the study sample and include
other variables that can moderate the relationships contrasted in this study.
References
Agostini, J. M. & Boss, J. F. (1972). Classifying informants in consumer surveys
according to their areas of interest: Further research and development. ESOMAR
Congress, Cannes.
Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modelling in prac-
tice: A review and recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin,
103(3), 411–423.
Bagozzi, R. P. & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.
Bailey, S. (1998). Household decision making: Relative influence of husbands and
wives in the 1990s. Doctoral Dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.
Bigné, J. E., Andreu, L. & Gnoth, J. (2005). The theme park experience: An analy-
sis of pleasure, arousal and satisfaction. Tourism Management, 26(6), 833–844.
Bigné, J. E., Sánchez, M. I. & Sánchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation varia-
bles and after purchase behaviour: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management,
22(6), 607–616.
Bryan, H. (2000). Recreation specialization revisited. Journal of Leisure Research,
32(1), 18–21.
Calvi, G. (1982). Analisi statistica delle tendenze rilevate nel periodo 1978–1982.
Milano: EURISKO (Paper).
Centre of Sociological Research. (2005). Barómetro junio, nº 2.612. Retrieved 15
May 2007, from: http://www.cis.es.
Chen, C.-F. & Tsai, D. (2007). How destination image and evaluative factors affect
behavioral intentions. Tourism Management, 28(4), 1115–1122.
Cohen, J. & Kaufman, C. J. (1991). The impact of subculture on blacks spousal
decision making. Research in Consumer Behavior, 5, 1–31.
Davis, H. L. (1976). Decision making within the household. Journal of Consumer
Research, 2(4), 241–260.
Davis, H. L. & Rigaux, B. P. (1974). Perception of marital roles in decision proc-
esses. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(1), 51–62.
Del Barrio, S. & Luque, T. (2000). Análisis de ecuaciones estructurales. In T.
Luque (Ed.), Técnicas de Análisis de Datos en Investigación de Mercados (pp.
489–557). Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide.
Dellaert, B. C. G., Ettema, D. F. & Lindh, C. (1998). Multi-faceted tourist travel
decisions: A constraint-based conceptual framework to describe tourists’ sequen-
tial choices of travel components. Tourism Management, 9(4), 313–320.
Fessenmaier, D. (1995). A preliminary examination of the complex tourism
decision making process. Working paper. Urbana Champaign, IL: Department of
Leisure Studies, University of Illinois.
Ford, J. B., LaTour, M. S. & Henthorne, T. L. (1995). Perception of marital roles
in purchase decision processes: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Academy of
Marketing, 23(2), 120–131.
Gilbert, F. & Warren, W. (1995). Psychographic constructs and demographic seg-
ments. Psychology and Marketing, 12(3), 223–237.
González, A. (1998). El estilo de vida como criterio de segmentación en el mercado
turístico: Propuesta metodológica y contrastación empírica. Tesis doctoral. Uni-
versidad de León.
González, A. (2005). La segmentación del mercado turístico por estilos de vida:
Una estrategia Empresarial en auge. Investigación y Marketing, 87, 18–24.
González, A., Bello, L. & Muñiz, N. (2000). Orientación de la empresa turística
del siglo XXI a los valores personales y los estilos de vida de los turistas. Cuader-
nos de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, 39, 59–86.
INE (Instituto Nacional de Estadística). (2005). Cuenta Satélite del Turismo en
España. Serie Contable 2000–2005. Retrieved 15 May 2007, from: http://www.
ine.es.
Juan, S. (1994). Estilos, modos y géneros de vida: Campos y variables para el análi-
sis socio-cultural. In A. Kaiero (Ed.), Valores y estilos de vida de nuestras socie-
dades en transformación: III Jornadas de Sociología (pp. 147–160). Bilbao, Spin:
University of Deusto.
Kang, S. K. & Hsu, C. H. (2005). Dyadic consensus on family vacation destination
selection. Tourism Management, 26(4), 571–582.
Kang, S. K., Hsu, C. H. & Wolfe, K. (2003). Family traveller segmentation by
vacation decision-making patterns. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research,
27(4), 448–469.
Koc, E. (2004). The role of family members in the family holiday purchase
decision-making process. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Administration, 5(2), 85–102.
Lawson, R. (1991). What is psychographic segmentation: A comparison between
general consumer analysis and product specific analysis. New Horizons in
Tourism and Hospitality Education, Training and Research Conference. Univer-
sity of Calgary, July 2–5, pp. 445–455.
Lazer, W. (1963). Life style concepts and marketing. In S. A. Gresyer (Ed.), Toward
scientific marketing (pp. 130–139). Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Litvin, S. W., Xu, G. & Kang, S. K. (2004). Spousal vacation-buying decision
making revisited across time and place. Journal of Travel Research, 43(2),
193–198.
Matzler, K., Füller, J. & Faullant, R. (2007). Customer satisfaction and loyalty to
Alpine ski resorts: The moderating effect of lifestyle, spending and customers’
skiing skills. International Journal of Tourism Research, 9(6), 409–421.
Mazanec, J. A. & Zins, A. H. (1994). Marketing in hospitality and tourism: A
consumer focus. London: Cassell.
Mitchell, A. (1983). The nine American lifestyles, New York: Macmillan Publish-
ing.
Mottiar, Z. & Quinn, D. (2004). Couple dynamics in household tourism decision
making: Women as the gatekeepers? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10(2),
149–160.
Myers, P. B. & Moncrief, L. W. (1978). Differential leisure travel decision-making
between spouses. Annals of Tourism Research, 5(1), 157–165.
Nanda, D., Hu, C. & Bai, B. (2006). Exploring family roles in purchasing decisions
during vacation planning: Review and discussions for future research. Journal of
Travel and Tourism Marketing, 20(3/4), 107–125.
Naylor, G. & Bardi, S. K. (2002). Exploring the differences in perceptions of satis-
faction across lifestyle segments. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 8(4), 343–351.
Ndubisi, N. O. (2007). Impact of joint product usage and family structure on joint
decision to purchase a vacation by Malaysian spouses. Journal of Vacation Mar-
keting, 12(2), 135–147.
Nelson, M. (1988). The resolution of conflict in joint purchase decisions of hus-
bands and wives: A review and empirical test. Advances in Consumer Research,
15, 436–441.
Pahl, J. (1995). His money, her money: Recent research on financial organisation
in marriage. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16(3), 361–376.
Pennington-Gray, L., Fridgen, J. D. & Stynes, D. (2003). Cohort segmentation: An
application to tourism. Leisure Sciences, 23(4), 341–361.
Plummer, J. T. (1974). The concept and application of life style segmentation.
Journal of Marketing, 38(1), 33–37.
Richie, J. R. & Filiatrault, P. (1980). Family vacation decision-making: A replica-
tion and extension. Journal of Travel Research, 18(4), 3–4.
Scott, N. & Parfitt, N. (2004). Lifestyle segmentation in tourism and leisure:
Imposing order or finding it? Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and
Tourism. Retrieved 10 April 2007, from: http://www.harworthpress.com/web/
JQAHT 2004.
Shields, R. (Ed.). (1992). Lifestyle shopping: The subject of consumption. London:
Routledge.
Shuptrine, F. K. & Samuelson, G. (1976). Dimension of marital roles in consumer
decision: Revisited. Journal of Marketing Research, 13(1), 276–278.
Silverberg, K. E., Backman, S. J. & Backman, K. F. (1996). A preliminary investi-
gation into the psychographics of nature-based travelers to the south-eastern
United States. Journal of Travel Research, 35(2), 19–28.
Spiro, R. L. (1983). Persuasion in family decision-making. Journal of Consumer
Research, 9(4), 393–402.
Thyne, M. & Laws, E. (2005). Hospitality, tourism and lifestyle concepts: Implica-
tions for quality management and customer satisfaction. Binghamton, NY:
Haworth Press Inc.
Van Raaij, W. F. & Francken, D. A. (1984). Vacation decisions, activities, and sat-
isfactions. Annals of Tourism Research, 11(1), 101–112.
Vogler, C. & Pahl, J. (1993). Social and economics change and the organisation of
money in marriage. Work, Employment and Society, 7(1), 71–95.
Vyncke, P. (2002). Lifestyle segmentation. European Journal of Communication,
17(4), 445–463.
Wang, K.-C., Hsieh, A.-T., Yehy, Y.-C. & Tsai, Ch-W. (2004). Who is the
decision-maker? The parents or the child in group package tours? Tourist Man-
agement, 25(2), 183–194.
Webster, C. & Reiss, M. (2001). Do established antecedents of purchase decision-
making power apply to contemporary couples? Psychology and Marketing,
18(9), 951–972.
Wind, Y. (1978) Issues and advances in segmentation research. Journal of Market-
ing Research, 15(3), 317–337.
Yankelovich, D. (1981a). Monitor. New York: Skelly & White.
Yankelovich, D. (1981b). The New Rules. New York: Bantam Books.
Zalatan, A. (1998). Wives’ involvement in tourism decision processes. Annals of
13 Access and use of e-commerce in
the Spanish tourism market
Juan Muro, Cristina Suárez and
María del Mar Zamora
Introduction
The use of the Internet has grown rapidly in a very short time, and nowa-
days it has become an indispensable product. Since 2000, the use of the
Internet in households and by individuals is widespread in developed coun-
tries. In the EU some countries, such as Germany, France and the UK, have
shown strong growth, as reflected in the data from the OECD (2007). The
Internet is a nearly perfect market with instantaneous information and
buyers comparing the offerings of sellers worldwide. In general, the Inter-
net could be deemed as an information system and also as an electronic
marketplace, so, these characteristics allow the Internet to be considered
an intermediary between buyers and sellers to exchange information about
prices and product offerings. One of the Internet markets that has been
developing towards higher levels of sales is the online travel-tourist market,
which has increased by as much as 34 per cent from 2004 to 2005 (Mar-
cussen, 2006).
The advantage of the use of the Internet with a tourism purpose is
twofold: it can act as a promotional tool or it can be used focusing on its
capacity to do e-trade. At first, the promotional application was the reason
why the tourist became so interested in the Internet. The second reason
was e-commerce, which should be understood as reservations and/or shop-
ping for tourist products. There are some studies that analyse demographic
characteristics linked with the individual decision to use the Internet
(Cassel, 1999; Goolsbee, 2000; Madden, Savage & Simpson, 1996; Rap-
poport, Kridel & Taylor, 2003). Others examine the consumer’s behaviour
in the online markets (Brynjolfsson & Smith, 2000; Clemons, Hann &
Hitt, 2002). However, the empirical literature on e-commerce for tourist
travel decisions is very scarce. It is limited to some mainly descriptive
papers, for Spain IBIT (2001), or for others not related to tourism consult
(Alm & Melnik, 2005; Goolsbee, 2000).
Our chapter focuses on the influence that e-commerce is having on the
tourist industry by assuming that tourists compare the stochastic utility of
several alternatives and select the one that maximizes their utility. Also,
The Spanish tourism market 171
considering that access to and use of the Internet are different concepts,
this chapter demonstrates how observed and unobserved determinants of
the access to the Internet with a tourism purpose are important in order to
buy online tourist travel products or services. With this purpose, we next
review a conceptual framework that explains the tourists’ choice in an
e-commerce model. We then describe the database and move on to show
the empirical results and the analysis on the factors that influence the
decision of e-commerce choice for foreign tourists who come to Spain.
Finally, we present the main conclusions on the impact of e-commerce on
the tourist purchase decision experience in Spain.
The e-commerce model

Online commerce presents Internet users with another method for purchas-
ing goods. Almost all goods traded online can also be purchased in tradi-
tional commerce. In this respect, the Internet presents simply another
venue for purchasing the same goods, and hence Internet-purchased goods
can be considered as perfect substitutes to some goods purchased in tradi-
tional commerce. Therefore, the consumer decision to purchase goods
online can be structured in the following way. First, it is assumed that the
utility function of the representative tourist is
U = U(q1, . . ., qk, z1, . . ., zn, d1, . . ., dr)
where q = (q1, . . ., qk) represents the vector of goods that can be purchased
preferably in traditional commerce (for example restaurant meals),
z = (z1, . . ., zn) denotes consumer goods that can be purchased in online
commerce and in traditional commerce, where they are perfect substitutes
(for example hotel beds) and, finally, d = (d1, . . ., dr) represents a good that
can be purchased preferably in online commerce (for example low-cost
airlines).
The consumer balance will be reduced to:
Max U = U(q1, . . ., qk, z1, . . ., zn, d1, . . ., dr)
Subject to:
pq q + pz z + pd d = Y
where pq, pz and pd are the vectors of prices and Y represents the income
level.
In this setting each tourist is assumed to have to choose between tourist
goods that can be purchased in online commerce and in traditional com-
merce. Due to the cross-sectional nature of the database it is assumed a
myopic behaviour. For any given tourist, defined by means of individually
observed characteristics, his/her utility is derived from a number of
172 J. Muro et al.
observed goods attributes and travel features and a set of unobservable
ones. The probability that a tourist i will choose to buy online equals the
probability associated with a positive difference in the comparisons
between the utility derived from buying online and the utility related to
traditional commerce. The difference between the online commerce and
the traditional commerce can be represented as an unobserved latent vari
able Yi*. So
Yi* = Xi′β + ui, (1)
such that one observes only the binary outcome,
Yi = 1 if Yi* > 0 and
Yi = 0 if Yi* ≤ 0.
However, one only observes Yi for observation i if the tourist has decided
to obtain access to the Internet (Ci = 1), where Ci* follows
Ci* = Zi′γ + εi (2)
where
Ci = 1 if Ci* > 0 and
Ci = 0 if Ci* ≤ 0.
Xi and Zi are variable vectors of individual characteristics that can be

common or not in both specifications (1) and (2). ui and εi are the error
terms for equations (1) and (2), respectively, distributed as bivariate
normal with mean zero, unit variance and ρ = Corr(ui,εi). After controlling
by observables the model allows for correlation between unobservables in
equations (1) and (2). As is well known, when ρ ≠ 0, standard probit tech-
niques applied to equation (1) yield biased results, and the probit model
with sample selection provides consistent, asymptotically efficient estimates
for all the parameters in such models.
Methodology
We use Spanish data on foreign tourism that come from the 2004 wave of
EGATUR (Encuesta de Gasto Turístico) the Spanish Foreign Tourist
Expenditure Survey provided by the Spanish Tourism Studies Institute
(Instituto de Estudios Turísticos), which has the responsibility of studying
all the factors impinging on tourism, together with drawing up and com-
piling statistics, information and data on tourism. This survey offers an
accurate idea of the total tourism expenditure made by foreign visitors
who come to Spain month by month on various types of trips. It also anal-
yses key aspects of the tourists’ behaviour and socio-demographic charac-
teristics. The survey is a questionnaire answered by 60,011 foreign tourists
visiting Spain and collected on a monthly basis in the frontiers, and it
requests information on socio-economic characteristics of the tourists. The
EGATUR sample does not have problems of selection bias because the
data include all types of tourists arriving in Spain and not only those that
use the Internet with a tourism purpose.
To highlight the importance of tourist access to the Internet and tourist
use of online shopping, we remark that 40 per cent of tourists use the
Internet as a way of obtaining information to visit Spain. If we analyse
those tourists who use the Internet, we show that the greater number of
those correspond to tourists who purchase with e-commerce (61.3 per
cent).
Table 13.1 shows descriptive statistics for the whole sample and the
access to the Internet sample. Independent variables have been defined as
dummy variables, which take a value of 1 if the tourist belongs to the cat-
egory specified and 0, otherwise. While most of the characteristics are
similar across the samples, it is important to remark the growing impor-
tance of e-commerce in products related to tourism in both samples. In
general, the tourist that is most likely to use e-commerce has the following
characteristics: country of residence UK, main destination the community
of Valencia, travel in low cost company, without package tour and with
university education.
Also, a peculiar fact is observed: on average, the younger tourist
presents a strong presence in the use of the Internet, as is expected, but
when the study analysed the sample of tourists with access to the Internet,
the behaviour changed and older people preferred the e-commerce. This
suggests the presence of a threshold age level under which older people do
not find the use of Internet profitable, but when they use these new tech-
nologies they are more likely to use e-commerce, especially if the purpose
of the trip is to relax (sun and beach).
The specifications proposed in the second part of this chapter can be
summarized with the following equations: the selection equation, which is
related to Internet access with a tourism purpose (equation (2)), and the main
equation, which is related to online commerce and is only observed if Inter-
net access exists (equation (1)). These equations incorporate a group of
common variables included in Xi and Zi, which are related to characteristics
that can influence tourist purchase choices and the possibility to undertake
certain activities, and they are common in both decisions (Internet access
versus no Internet access, and online commerce versus traditional commerce).
Table 13.1 Percentage of e-commerce by tourists’ characteristics, trip attributes and other control variables
Tourists’ characteristics Total Internet Total Internet

tourists (%) access (%) tourists (%) access (%)
Age Country of residence

24 years 36.19 23.91 France 6.84 13.40
24  age  44 29.69 23.59 Germany 14.29 14.58
44  age  64 21.60 24.75 United Kingdom 24.09 20.90
 65 years 12.52 27.76 Italy 17.98 17.44
Netherlands 21.69 18.30
Purpose of the trip
Rest of the World 15.11 15.38
Work and business 22.74 30.66
Sun and beach (or relax) 32.39 30.17 Organization of the trip
Other motives 44.87 39.17 without package tour 70.19 66.49
with package tour 29.81 33.51
Age and purpose of the trip
 24 years and sun and beach 32.56 22.59 Trip attributes
24  age  44 and sun and beach 31.35 23.18 Tourist main destination
44  age  64 and sun and beach 23.16 25.51 Rest of Spain 13.43 13.18
 65 years and sun and beach 12.93 28.71 Andalusia 12.06 16.25
 24 years and work and business 38.19 26.15 Balearic Island 16.44 16.70
24  age  44 and work and business 23.68 23.91 Canary Island 8.16 7.76
44  age  64 and work and business 20.32 25.21 Catalonia 15.88 14.64
 65 years and work and business 17.81 24.72 Community of Valencia 22.46 18.31
 24 years and other motives 37.61 23.57 Madrid 11.57 13.16
24  age  44 and other motives 33.53 25.56
Length of stay
44  age  64 and other motives 18.78 24.19
1  days  3 28.94 35.46
 65 years and other motives 10.07 26.68
4  days  7 37.96 32.71
8 days 33.10 31.83
Spending per person and day Type of travel
Less than C50 15.42 18.53 Full service airline 26.01 31.09
Between C50 and C99 18.35 17.01 Low cost company 67.26 51.64
Between C100 and C149 18.12 15.19 Road 6.73 17.28
Between C150 and C249 21.00 17.42
Other control variables
Between C250 and C450 17.41 17.28
Seasonality
More than C450 9.70 14.57
First Quarter 24.20 26.16
Level of education Second Quarter 24.57 24.63
Basic education 20.62 27.16 Third Quarter 23.90 23.67
Medium education 35.00 35.99 Fourth Quarter 27.33 25.54
University education 44.38 36.85
Number of visits
Number of visits 10 47.58 55.55
Number of visits 10 52.42 44.45
176 J. Muro et al.
These variables are related to the tourists’ characteristics, trip attributes and
other control variables as age, level of education, level of spending per
person and day, length of stay, purpose and organization of the trip, sea-
sonality, fidelity, country of residence and main destination.
Some of these common variables are not included with the same specifi-
cation in the main and selection equations because it is assumed that there
are different ways of influencing. Also, a group of variables show specific
characteristics related to the main decision and not with the selection
decision, like travel to Spain with a low cost company because these types
of companies do not frequently work with traditional commerce.
Equations (1) and (2) are estimated simultaneously by maximum likeli-
hood (Van de Ven & Van Pragg, 1981). The estimated parameters are
reported in Table 13.2. Table 13.3 shows the estimated pseudo-elasticities
derived from Table 13.2 model used to quantify the impact of a specific
variable on the decision to use e-commerce. This measure calculates the
percentage of change in the probability of using e-commerce when tourists
change some of their characteristics with regard to the tourist of reference.
The reference tourist in the model is a tourist more than 64 years old,
whose motives of travel are others different from sun and beach or work
and business, with a university education, who comes from the Nether-
lands, with a spending level greater than C450 per person and day, travel-
ling without a package tour and by road, with main destination Balearic
Island, a length of stay over eight days, travelling in the first quarter and
has made fewer than ten visits. This reference tourist has a probability of
using e-commerce of 3.62 per cent.
Furthermore, supposing Di is a variable that belongs to both equations
(1) and (2) and, additionally, Di is a dummy variable. The total pseudo-
elasticity (TPE) of a change in Di can be split into two terms, one will
account for the “direct effect” on the probability that Yi = 1 conditioned
on C = 1, and the other will measure the “indirect effect” on this condi-
tional probability. Thus,
 
Φ(X′iβ, D = 1)
TPEDi = _____________
     – 1  +
Φ(X′iβ, D = 0)  (direct effect)
 
Ξ(D = 1)
+ _________
 
Ξ(D = 0)
    
– 1  (indirect effect)
With Ξ(•) equals to
BVN(Yi = 1, C = 1) – Φ(X′iβ)Φ(Z′iγ)
Ξi(X′i β,Z′iγ,ρ = ________________________________
           
Φ(Z′iγ)
Where BVN(•) is used to denote the Cumulative Distribution Function of

the Bivariate Normal Distribution, Φ(•) is the Distribution Function of the
Standard Normal Distribution. Estimated TPE and its decomposition in
direct and indirect effects are also presented in Table 13.3. The estimation
of ρ in the model is statistically significant and suggests that controlling for
the likelihood of the use of the Internet is critical in determining the
e-commerce effects. Its positive sign implies that the unobserved factors
affecting either the probability of Internet access or online shopping are
positively correlated. In other words, the two outcomes are positively cor-
related after controlling for the tourists’ characteristics and the attributes
of the destination itself.
We introduce tourist characteristics to explore differences in sensitivity
to different aspects of e-commerce. Differences in age variables have a
special behaviour. They show coefficients statistically significant and with
predictable signs. Being younger makes a tourist more likely to have access
to the Internet and more likely to buy online when the purpose of the trip
is sun and beach. It is important to remark that the existence of a thresh-
old age, as suggested before, is rejected when it is controlled for sample
selection and other tourist characteristics. On the other hand, if the
purpose of the trip is work and business relations, the tourist of principal
working age has less probability of buying online. Business tourists behave
differently from leisure tourists, the latter have higher price sensitivity than
the former and hence e-commerce acts as a determinant in the decision-
making processes of leisure tourists. The same result is found in the access
to the Internet equation, leisure tourists look for tourist information online
more than business travellers.
Table 13.3 shows that a young tourist whose purpose of the trip is sun
and beach has an increase in the probability of using e-commerce of 25.2
per cent in respect to the tourist of reference and, on the other hand, tour-
ists with an age between 24 and 44 whose purpose of the trip is work and
business relations have a decrease in the probability of using e-commerce
of 53.7 per cent in respect to the tourist of reference. Also, Table 13.3 does
not show the indirect pseudo-elasticities due to the different variable defi-
nition for this concept in the selection and the main equations; for this
reason, the direct marginal effects are equal to the total marginal effects.
Education has a consistently positive and statistically significant impact
on Internet access rate and on the probability of buying online. In general,
most of the tourists show low probabilities of using e-commerce; approxi-
mately 88 per cent of the tourists present probabilities below 50 per cent
of using e-commerce. The reason for this low estimated probability is that
the proportion of tourists who use this method of payment is small in rela-
tion to the other categories. A higher level of education implies more
knowledge about the Internet and its utilities for looking up information
and, in that sense, makes a tourist more likely to buy online.
Another interesting fact is the magnitude of the total pseudo-elasticities.
If the estimation does not take into account the selection equation, the
pseudo-elasticities (direct pseudo-elasticities) are at highest absolute values
Table 13.2 Estimation of the probit model with sample selection
E-commerce Coef. Std Error Internet access Coef. Std Error
Age and purpose of the trip Age

 24 years and sun and beach 0.145 (0.047)*** 24 years 1.127 (0.029)***
24  age  44 and sun and beach 0.089 (0.031)*** 24  age  44 0.901 (0.024)***
44  age  64 and sun and beach 0.062 (0.033)* 44  age  64 0.541 (0.024)***
 24 years and work and business –0.179 (0.125)
Purpose of the trip
24  age  44 and work and business –0.432 (0.044)***
Work and business –0.503 (0.024)***
44  age  64 and work and business –0.352 (0.073)***
Sun and beach 0.097 (0.017)***
Spending per person and day
Less than C50 0.478 (0.060)***
Less than C50 –0.186 (0.034)***
Between C50 and C99 0.505 (0.054)***
Between C50 and C99 0.119 (0.032)***
Between C100 and C149 0.475 (0.055)***
Between C100 and C149 0.270 (0.032)***
Between C150 and C249 0.449 (0.054)***
Between C150 and C249 0.302 (0.031)***
Between C250 and C450 0.284 (0.055)***
Between C250 and C450 0.241 (0.031)***
Level of education
Level of education
Basic education –0.263 (0.042)***
Basic education –0.351 (0.020)***
Medium education –0.065 (0.025)***
Medium education –0.274 (0.013)***
Country of residence
France –0.210 (0.063)***
France –0.787 (0.030)***
Germany 0.023 (0.043)
Germany –0.136 (0.027)***
United Kingdom 0.256 (0.040)***
United Kingdom 0.075 (0.026)***
Italy –0.203 (0.053)***
Italy –0.298 (0.034)***
Rest of the world –0.193 (0.043)***
Rest of the world –0.278 (0.027)***
Organization with package tour –0.841 (0.040)***
Organization with package tour –0.674 (0.018)***
Type of travel Tourist main destination
Full service airline 1.106 (0.040)*** Rest of Spain 0.156 (0.025)***
Low cost company 1.820 (0.044)*** Andalusia –0.435 (0.025)***
Canary Island 0.129 (0.019)***
Tourist main destination
Catalonia 0.146 (0.022)***
Rest of Spain –0.223 (0.042)***
Community of Valencia 0.232 (0.024)***
Andalusia –0.181 (0.051)***
Madrid –0.143 (0.030)***
Canary Island –0.633 (0.036)***
Catalonia –0.055 (0.037) Length of stay
Community of Valencia 0.211 (0.043)*** 1  days  3 –0.305 (0.020)***
Madrid –0.323 (0.048)*** 4  days  7 –0.061 (0.014)***
Length of stay Seasonality
1  days  3 0.285 (0.041)*** Second quarter 0.061 (0.017)***
4  days  7 0.147 (0.023)*** Third quarter –0.007 (0.016)
Fourth quarter 0.142 (0.017)***
Seasonality
Second quarter –0.083 (0.030)*** Number of visits 10 –0.166 (0.012)***
Third quarter –0.131 (0.029)*** Constant –0.490 (0.054)***
Fourth quarter –0.056 (0.030)**
Number of visits 10 0.185 (0.025)***
Constant –1.100 (0.105)***
Rho 0.206 (0.079)***
Log pseudolikelihood –47469.55
Number of obs. 60,011 Censored obs. 36,031 Uncensored obs. 23,980
Notes
Reference tourist: more than 64 years old, other motives of travel, University education, Netherlands, more than C450 of spending per person and day,
without package tour, travel by road, Balearic Island, length of stay over eight days, first quarter, less than ten visits.
*** Level of significance 1, ** level of significance, 5, * level of significance 10.
Table 13.3 Estimated pseudo-elasticities
Pseudo-elasticity
Direct Indirect Total
Age and purpose of the trip
24 years and sun and beach 25.23 25.23
24  age  44 and sun and beach 15.05 15.05
44  age  64 and sun and beach 10.36 10.36
24 years and work and business– related –25.90 –25.90
24  age  44 and work and business related –53.73 –53.73
44  age  64 and work and business related –46.05 –46.05
Less than C50 96.68 67.89 164.56
Between C50 and C99 103.36 38.00 141.37
Between C100 and C149 95.99 20.91 116.89
Between C150 and C249 89.82 16.02 105.84
Between C250 and C450 52.83 8.19 61.02
Level of education
Basic education –36.30 –5.47 –41.77
Medium education –10.13 13.56 3.43
France –29.95 33.64 3.69
Germany 3.78 13.24 17.02
United Kingdom 46.88 20.12 67.01
Italy –29.06 –1.75 –30.81
Rest of the World –27.76 –1.86 –29.62
Organization with package tour –80.72 –52.19 –132.92
Type of travel
Full service airline 270.37 270.37
Low cost company 463.13 463.13
Tourist main destination
Rest of Spain –31.46 –32.07 –63.52
Andalusia –26.22 10.87 –15.35
Canary Island –69.39 –62.68 –132.07
Catalonia –8.49 –15.92 –24.41
Community of Valencia 37.79 2.39 40.18
Madrid –42.95 –24.89 –67.84
Length of stay
1  days  3 52.94 60.02 112.96
4  days  7 25.57 20.94 46.51
Seasonality
Second quarter –12.65 –12.89 –25.55
Third quarter –19.50 –13.25 –32.76
Fourth quarter –8.75 –15.82 –24.57
Number of visits 10 32.70 34.63 67.33
and lead to a mistake. In general the results show that the indirect pseudo-
elasticities are changing the values of the total pseudo-elasticities and
confirm the significance of controlling Internet access with a tourism
purpose.
With respect to the differences by origin market we find that a tourist
who comes from the UK presents the greatest probability of buying online;
as Marcussen (2006) points out, the UK became the largest online travel
market in Europe in the last years. On the other hand, the tourist who
comes from France has the lowest probability. British tourists are about 67
per cent more likely to buy online than the reference tourist. A curious
effect is produced with France: nearly all of the positive total effect of the
French tourist is the indirect effect on the probability itself, as opposed to
the direct effect, which has a negative one. The main destination for tour-
ists who access and purchase using the Internet is the community of Valen-
cia, while the Canary Islands show the lowest probability for tourism
e-commerce. The percentage change in probability to buy online for desti-
nation Valencia in relation to the reference tourist is 40.2 per cent more
likely and is the only positive one.
The trade-off among package holidays has a negative effect on the prob-
ability of e-commerce. The explanation of this result can be found in the
different ways of planning travel, directly or indirectly through distribution
channels such as travel agents. A new tourism distribution system has
emerged that requires a better knowledge of environments and the Internet
can act as a promotional tool and/or it can be used focusing on its capacity
to do e-commerce for individual tourists that planned their tourism
without a package. Also evidenced in Table 13.2 is the fact that the use of
a low cost airline to come to Spain increases the probability of e-commerce.
This is one of the most important characteristics of this type of company,
which prefers direct access to a consumer only through call centres and the
Internet, and also it is important to remark that the type of service most
demanded in the online market is air travel with 56 per cent of the
demand.

The use of the Internet is changing people’s behaviour in developed coun-
tries, especially in the online travel market where the Internet can act as a
promotional tool or/and it can be used focusing on its capacity to do
e-trade. This chapter analyses the microeconomic determinants of the tour-
ists’ e-commerce choices for foreign tourism arriving in Spain in 2004. In
the first step, this study describes this socio-economic characteristic for a
tourist with online purchases in the whole sample (tourists that look up
information and buy by Internet) and in the access to Internet sample
(tourists that buy using e-commerce), and the chapter finds that most of
the characteristics are similar across the sample. Then, we specify and
182 J. Muro et al.
estimate a probit model with sample selection in order to identify the
socio-economic characteristics of the tourist that have more influence on
the likelihood of Internet use with a tourism purpose as opposed to buying
tourist products using traditional commerce.
This model is necessary for the aim of controlling e-commerce effects
for the likelihood of Internet use. The data confirm this evidence showing
the statistical significance of the correlation coefficient for the tourists that
access and finally use the Internet to buy products and services related to
tourism. The factors that influence the behaviour of tourists who access
and use the Internet with a tourism purpose are similar. Then, the tourist
that is more likely to use e-commerce is a young person coming from the
UK and looking for Spanish beach and sun preferably in the community of
Valencia: this kind of tourist travels with low cost companies and usually
without package holidays.
References
Alm, J. & Melnik, M. I. (2005). Sales taxes and the decision to purchase online.
Public Finance Review, 33(2), 184–212.
Brynjolfsson, E. & Smith, M. (2000). Frictionless commerce? A comparison of
internet and conventional retailers. Management Science, 46(4), 563–585.
Cassel, C. (1999). Demand for and use of additional lines by residential customers.
In D. G. Loomis and L. D. Taylor (Eds.), The future of the telecommunications
industry: Forecasting and demand analysis (pp. 43–59). Boston, MA: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Clemons, E., Hann, I. & Hitt, L. (2002). Price dispersion and differentiation in
online travel: An empirical investigation. Management Science, 48(4), 534–549.
Goolsbee, A. (2000). In a world without borders: The impact of taxes on internet
commerce. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(2), 561–576.
IBIT (2001). Study on electronic commerce in the value chain of the tourism sector.
Islas Baleares: Fundación IBIT.
Madden, G., Savage, S. & Simpson, M. (1996). Information inequality and broad-
band network access: An analysis of Australian household survey data. Indus-
trial and Corporate Change, 5(4), 1049–1066.
Marcussen, C. H. (2006). Trends in European internet distribution of travel and
tourism services. Retrieved 28 January 2008, from: http://www.crt.dk/uk/staff/
chm/trends.htm.
OECD. (2007). OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard 2007: Innova-
tion and performance in the global economy. Paris: OECD.
Rappoport, P. N., Kridel, D. J. & Taylor, L. D. (2003). The demand for broad-
band: Access, content and the value of time. In R. W. Crandall and J. H. Alleman
(Eds.), Broadband: Should we regulate high-speed internet access? Washington,
DC: AEI Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies.
Van de Ven, W. P. M. M. & Van Pragg, B. M. S. (1981). The demand for deducti-
bles in private health insurance: A probit model with sample selection. Journal of
Econometrics, 17(2), 229–252.
14 The formation of destination
choice sets
An interpretive approach
Alain Decrop
Introduction
Consumers’ decision making (DM) is often presented as a sequential
process involving a series of steps from need recognition (awareness) to
final choice (purchase) through evaluation. In other words, product
decisions are thought to arise from cognitive, affective and conative stages
that lie at the core of hierarchy-of-effects (e.g., Lavidge & Steiner, 1961)
and most consumer behavior models (e.g., Engel, Kollat & Blackwell,
1973). Both product alternatives and attributes may be used as a reference
point when using such models. This chapter focuses on alternatives. The
way product or brand alternatives are first considered and then evaluated
in order to come to a final choice is the focus of choice set (CS) models.
These assume a funneling categorization process in which the number of
alternatives from all brands the consumer is aware of is narrowed down to
a single final choice. The concept of choice sets will be used as a generic
term throughout this chapter to point at the different sets of destination
alternatives that are considered by consumers in their choice processes.
The aim of the chapter is to reconsider CS theory, especially that which
is related to tourism and destination choice, in a qualitative interpretative
perspective. Two major arguments justify why such a “rediscovery” is
needed. First, extant literature on destination CS involves a few controver-
sies and dark zones. As shown later, most studies have focused on the
structure and size of sets and on some variables impacting on the funneling
process related to the formation of CS. In contrast, major aspects such as
the dynamics of CS evolving over time or the categorization and evaluation
processes underlying CS remain unexplored: “it is unclear how an indi-
vidual funnels the large number of alternatives from the initial CS to select
the final destination and which principles are used in the process, at least
from an empirical point of view” (Hong, Kim, Jang & Lee, 2006, p. 750).
Second, CS theory has been dominated by a cognitive–affective–conative
hierarchical and sequential vision that is in line with the idea of a
(bounded) rational decision maker but leaves few room for hedonistic,
adaptive and opportunistic perspectives that may be very important in
184 A. Decrop
vacation DM (Decrop & Snelders, 2005). Fournier and Mick (1999, p. 5)
warn that “reliance on a single paradigm or method may pose serious lim-
itations for any marketing phenomenon.” For these two reasons, reconsid-
ering CS theory is worthwhile: what are different types of CS? How do
they relate to each other? How stable are they over time? How do they
lead to choice? These questions are addressed here by investigating CS in
depth and dynamically, in their natural context.
Choice set models in tourism research

Choice or consideration set theory is concerned with how consumers deal
with the multitude of brands that are available in many product categories.
CS theory has benefited from substantial interest in the marketing literat-
ure (Brisoux & Laroche, 1980; Hauser & Wernerfelt, 1990; Howard,
1977; Howard & Sheth, 1969; Narayana & Markin, 1975; Nedungadi,
1990; Spiggle & Sewall, 1987). Those authors suggest three typical stages.
First, the brand-consideration stage involves retrieval (a function of both
memory and brand accessibility) to arrive at an awareness set. Next, the
brand-evaluation stage pertains to the evaluation of brands to arrive at an
evoked set. Finally, the choice stage leads to the selection of a single brand
using decision strategies or rules. This conceptualization works in a hierar-
chical manner: “it is now a truism of marketing that brand awareness is a
necessary precondition for choice” (Nedungadi, 1990, p. 264); the con-
sumer has to evaluate these brands before making a final choice. As we
move up in the hierarchy, a more severe selection of product alternatives
occurs.
Most models of vacation DM are presented either in the form of CS in
input–output approaches of DM (e.g., Um & Crompton, 1990; Woodside
& Lysonski, 1989) or in the form of cognitive processes (e.g., Mathieson
& Wall, 1982; Moutinho, 1987). In CS models, the focus is on the evolu-
tion of vacation destinations and/or plans in a series of different CS. Those
models are in line with the three-stage conceptualization presented above.
The consideration set (evoked set) comprises all the destinations the vaca-
tioner is contemplating for his/her current holiday. It is part of the per-
ceived opportunity set (awareness set), which includes all the destinations
known to the vacationer. As the latter is not omniscient, the awareness set
is itself only a part of the total opportunity set that entails all possible des-
tination alternatives (Goodall, 1991; Woodside & Sherell, 1977).
Choice then consists in an evaluation and selection process where the
different destinations in the consideration set are compared on an altern-
ative and/or an attribute basis. Crompton and his colleagues (Ankomah,
Crompton & Baker, 1996; Crompton, 1992; Crompton & Ankomah,
1993; Um & Crompton, 1990) introduce a distinction between the initial
CS (awareness set), consisting of a large number of alternatives, and the
late CS (evoked set), a reduced set from which the final destination is
Formation of destination choice sets 185
chosen. This distinction is applied by Botha, Crompton and Kim (1999)
and Hong et al. (2006) in order to investigate the roles of categorization,
affective image and constraints in forming destination CS. The latter
authors show that the intention to visit a particular destination is deter-
mined sequentially from the late CS. Woodside and Lysonski (1989)
further make a distinction between evoked set, inert set (made of the
brands for which the consumer has a neutral evaluation) and inept set
(entailing brands the consumer is not considering due to a poor previous
experience or negative information).
In addition to structure of CS, a few authors have considered their sizes
while others have studied the variables impacting the formation process of
CS. As to sizes, Woodside and Sherell (1977), Thompson and Cooper
(1979) and Woodside and Lysonski (1989) respectively report evoked sets
means of 3.4, 2.7 and 4.2 destinations. Bronner and De Hoog (1985)
support Woodside and Sherell’s (1977) proposition that vacationers make
the effort to evaluate only a few (four ± two) alternatives among a much
larger set of available choices. Woodside and Lysonski (1989, pp. 12–13)
futher mention that “the average size of the respondents’ consideration [i.e.,
evoked] sets was significantly greater than the average number of countries
mentioned in the respondents’ inert, unavailable, and inept sets.” Ankomah
et al. (1996) and Harrison-Hill (2001) investigate the relationship between
CS and cognitive distance. The former authors find that the accuracy of
cognitive distance varies with the type of CS, with accuracy increasing for
destinations within the late set. Authors such as Botha et al. (1999), Cromp-
ton and Ankomah (1993) and Hong et al. (2006) suggest that three types of
criteria affect the funneling process through which the number of altern-
atives is reduced: personal motivations or push factors, destination
attributes or pull factors and situational variables or constraints.
Methodology
This chapter is part of a larger study on vacation DM in which the destina-
tion choice process of 25 Belgian decision-making units (DMUs) has been
followed for a whole year. Informants likely to yield rich and varied
information were selected in order to maximize theory development
(Strauss & Corbin, 1990). DMUs consisted of four types: six singles (rep-
resenting tourists who decide on their own), six couples (married or non-
married), ten families with children and three groups of friends.
Acknowledging any intention to go on summer vacation was the only cri-
terion to be eligible for the study. Informants were interviewed in depth
three times (in February, April and June) before the summer vacation. This
naturalistic longitudinal design helps to understand the context and
dynamics of CS evolving over time.
During each interview, most members of the DMU were present, includ-
ing children. Informants were asked to talk about three central themes:
186 A. Decrop
(1) general vacation and travel behavior, (2) expectations and motives
and (3) current vacation projects and considered destinations for the
summer. This third theme included questions about plans, CS, constraints
and situational variables, product alternatives and attributes, information
sources and previous experience. Most informants spontaneously men-
tioned a number of destinations when telling about their summer travel
plans. Moreover, more particular questions were asked, such as: Have
you considered particular travel destinations yet? Which destination(s)?
Why that (those) destination(s)? Are these destinations available to you?
Why? (If more destinations.) Which destination do you prefer or are you
most likely to go to? Are there some destinations where you will never go?
The analysis and interpretation of the interview transcripts was based
on the grounded theory approach, which is “a qualitative research method
that uses a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived
grounded theory about a phenomenon” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 24).
Categories, patterns and propositions emerged from the coding process of
the data (rather than being imposed beforehand). Coding was made at
three levels (i.e., open, axial and selective) from the most descriptive to the
most interpretive, from the most concrete events to the most abstract proc-
esses. Memos and diagrams were used as well, to assist in interpretation
and establishing connections between concepts.
The emerging findings of this empirical study are presented following three
major themes. The first theme develops a typology of choice sets that
extends previous typologies by introducing two new types (i.e., dream and
surrogate sets). Next, the focus is on the size of destination evoked sets.
Finally, emerging issues of timelessness and turnarounds in the formation
of destination choice sets are discussed.
Types of choice sets

Six types of CS emerged from the coding process and are described in
Table 14.1. Each set contains none, one or more destinations. When
looking at the relative importance of each set (in terms of how often the
informant mentioned destinations), the evoked set proves to be the most
important in the interview data. The excluded set and the unavailable set
are also important, although to a lesser extent. In contrast, destinations in
the alternative set and the awareness set are mentioned less often.
We see that the unavailable set becomes much more important than the
excluded set over the three series of interviews. This trend is in line with an
evolution of plans from dream to reality, which helps differentiating these
two types of CS. On the one hand, the excluded set contains destinations
that are rejected by the vacationer in an absolute and willing way. Most of
Table 14.1 Types of CS in vacationers’ DM processes
Type of CS Emerging definition
Alternative set Destinations that are not prioritized by the vacationer. These
include spare destinations (“one never knows . . .”) or
opportunistic destinations.
Awareness set Destinations the vacationer knows but does not express any
affection with. This set reveals knowledge but not intention.
Dream set Destinations that are considered as ideal places for traveling or
vacationing but are permanently unavailable because of enduring
structural inhibitors.
Evoked set Destinations considered spontaneously by the vacationer for
future (but not especially the next) summer vacation.
Excluded set Destinations definitely rejected by the vacationer (“I would never
stay there”).
Unavailable set Destinations considered by the vacationer that are temporarily
unavailable because of particular situational constraints.
the time this is the result of a general lack of interest (“New York does not
interest me at all”) or from an excessive weakness of the destination on
particular attributes (climate, nature, culture) that are highly valued by
informants. Motives and activities may also be the reason for excluding
particular destinations (e.g. a few informants avoid any “beach” destina-
tion, like Spain). Variety seeking and emotional factors also come into
play. Note that the excluded set may vary according to vacation motives
and definitions. The following quote illustrates how destinations like
Poland and Russia are excluded for vacationing (relaxing) but would not
be rejected for traveling (visiting):
MichÈle: but I would never want to go to Poland or . . . even Russia.

PATRICK: Yes maybe because if we go there, it’s more to visit, so we tend
to fall back on the first case [i.e., travel and not vacation].
MichÈle: Yes, that’s what we call traveling, it’s not a vacation.
In contrast with the excluded set, the unavailable set is composed of tem-
porarily and unwillingly rejected destinations. Findings show that this set
strongly depends on situational factors, which are concerned with a par-
ticular decision situation and become more important when the summer
vacation approaches. Time (related to occupation), money and children are
the major ones. It is not surprising that the unavailable set is less stable
than the excluded set. It also proves to be far less stable than the dream
set. The difference between the unavailable and the dream set is a reflec-
tion of the difference between situational, that is time and/or space-bound,
variables and enduring structural influences.
188 A. Decrop
Size of destination evoked sets
The evoked set is either composed of alternative destinations, in the sense
of one or the other, or of combined destinations, that is, a combination of
more destinations in the same vacation plan. In the data, the number of
evoked destinations ranges from zero to four. Most of the time, only one
or two destinations are evoked. It never happens that the informant spon-
taneously gives more than four alternative destinations. This is in line with
findings of previous studies presented above. Our data further show that
the number and evolution of evoked destinations is a function of involve-
ment (the higher involved, the larger and the less stable the evoked set),
and decision timing (the earlier the decision, the smaller and the more
stable the evoked set). Two emerging factors explain the limited size of
destination evoked sets. First, destination is not always the major vacation
choice criteria; as a result, informants do not process that item in much
depth. Second, destination proves to be a hyper-complex product. Belonax
and Mittelstaedt (1978) show that having more choice criteria leads to
larger evaluation costs and hence to smaller CS. When being asked whether
they had thought of other destinations than three evoked places (i.e.,
Turkey, Prague and Saint Petersburg), the parents of a large family
answered:
Louis: No, it’s already complicated enough to think about three. I don’t
think we thought about another one.
JacQueline: It’s already complicated enough! And after all, we don’t have
any other desires: it’s always the same ones that come back. Prague,
we will go there too, but maybe one time at Easter, for a week or . . .
We realize that maybe there are less tourists if we go in the off-peak
season, outside the main summer vacation time. It’s easier, it’s closer.
No, we haven’t thought of other things.
Other destinations are mentioned but these fall into the other sets described
above. However, these other sets are smaller than the evoked set, confirm-
ing Woodside and Lysonski (1989). When looking at the evolution of
evoked sets over time, there is a relative stability between the first (mean
t1 = 1.93 destinations/DMU or 1.62/Plan) and second series of interviews
(mean t2 = 1.96/DMU or 1.58/plan), and a slight reduction in the third
series (mean t3 = 1.72/DMU and 1.29/plan). Four groups can be
distinguished:
1 DMUs with a large evoked set (three or four destinations), which is

decreasing over time (n = 6). These vacationers are highly involved,
they have fewer personal constraints (singles, couples or older families)
but make their decisions very late (less than one month before depar-
ture). The content of plans also shows less stability: newer plans or
destinations often appear over time.
2 The second group (n = 7) is concerned with DMUs with an initially
small (one or two destinations) evoked set, decreasing to zero or one
destination in t2 or t3. This group is characterized by early DM (a des-
tination is definitely chosen or the decision not to go on vacation is
taken). These are rather highly involved and older single vacationers.
3 DMUs with an initially (t1) small but then (t2) expanding number of
vacation destinations, and then (t3) decreasing again (n = 5). These
informants show little stability regarding the content of their vacation
plans, most of the time because of children. The final decision is taken
very late . . . or is never made.
4 DMUs with a low (zero or one) and stable number of evoked destina-
tion alternatives (n = 7). This group is characterized by low vacation
involvement, a lot of constraints, early (or last minute) DM and loyalty
(people going to the same place).
Timelessness and turnarounds in destination choice sets

When interviewing, it soon appeared that many vacation destinations or
plans evoked by informants stemmed from earlier CS. Previous years’
destinations or plans, which had been abandoned or postponed due to per-
sonal or structural constraints, or higher preferences for other alternatives,
were coming back to the surface again. In the same way, plans and
destinations do not always pertain to the current year but also to the
coming years. Further, most informants do not only have vacation ideas
and plans for the summer vacation but also for other periods of the
year. In short, more projects, which are in different states of progress,
coexist in the vacationer’s mind. Instead of speaking of different CS, data
suggest that it is preferable to speak of one “macro” timeless CS. Indeed,
the different alternatives included in one CS do not pertain to only one and
the same consumption situation (or purchase decision) bounded in time
and space. As far as destinations are concerned, the CS should be defined
as a set of alternatives that are all possible in the nearby future. We think
this finding is typical of vacation and travel services, whose decisions are
timely recurrent but still highly variable. Such a “macro” CS allows the
consumer to solve trade-offs more easily and not to give up desirable
alternatives forever: “if it is not this year, it will be for next year.” In con-
trast, a minority of DMUs are considering only one vacation project at a
time:
Marie-France: Personally I don’t do very much planning. I have friends

who plan a lot in advance: “trips next year and then in two years,
we’ll put a bit of money aside, so we can go to such a place . . .” But I
don’t do that at all: the vacation comes and I plan a bit beforehand
but these are not precise projects. I don’t live in the hope of
realizing . . .
190 A. Decrop
A last emerging finding is worthwhile mentioning. For more DMUs, the
final chosen destination has little to do with the destinations that were ini-
tially mentioned. There are two major explanations of such turnarounds.
On the one hand, there is a growing realism of plans. In the first round of
interviews, informants used to dream aloud when mentioning possible
summer vacation destinations. While aware of actual and potential con-
straints, they tried to convince themselves that “the project is still pos-
sible.” That dream dimension is much less present in the two next series of
interviews. Considered destinations become more “realistic,” in the sense
that contextual inhibitors are taken into account to a large extent. As far
as the evoked set of destinations is decreasing to a singleton, the unavaila-
ble set becomes larger than the dream set. This finding is in line with Um
and Crompton’s (1990) two-stages conceptualization where destination
choice timely evolves from the awareness set (“all the preferred destina-
tions of your dreams”) to an evoked set that only includes the “reason
able” alternatives once situational constraints have been taken into
account. Moreover, opportunities such as an invitation by relatives or a
special offer that is advertised may come across. This results in the sudden
awareness of previously unaware destinations. These new alternatives may
finally be preferred and chosen over the other alternatives.
Based on previous findings, the conceptualization of Figure 14.1 is pro-
posed. First, there is the perceptual stage: the vacationer is either aware or
not of existing destinations. Next, destinations in the awareness set are
evaluated. If evaluation is positive, destinations fall into the evoked set
(more preferred) or the alternative set (less preferred). If it is negative, they
Unawareness set
All existing
destinations Excluded set
Awareness Final
set Surrogate choice
set Available set
Evoked set Unavailable

set
Dream set
CONTEXT:
Environmental factors: social, cultural, geographical, etc.

Personal factors: DMU type, travel experience, motives, level of involvement,
money, time and cognitive resources, etc.
Situational factors: commercial and private information, product availability,
emotions and moods, side projects, opportunities, etc.
Task factors: trip duration and distance to travel.
Figure 14.1 Conceptualization of destination CS.

result in the excluded set. In the evoked set, destinations may be classified
into one of three sets depending on contextual influences: if contextual
inhibitors are enduring, they end in the dream set; if they are situational,
they fall into the unavailable set; if there is no contextual inhibitor, one
speaks of the available set. The final choice is made either from the availa-
ble set, the alternative set or straight from the awareness set. In the altern-
ative set, we find spare destinations. A spare destination is chosen when the
available set decreases to no alternative at all (due to particular constraints).
It also happens in the data that destinations, which were not considered in
first instance, are suddenly proposed to the vacationer (see the dotted arrow
from the unawareness set to the awareness set in Figure 14.1). The latter
may finally choose one of those opportunistic destinations rather than one
alternative in the available and alternative sets (see the dotted arrow from
the awareness set to choice). This straight recourse to the awareness set
highlights that evaluation is not always necessary for choice. Nedungadi
(1990) offers another explanation. He focuses on the stage of CS formation
prior to evaluation and choice. He provides empirical evidence that brand
choice is “significantly altered outside the traditional evaluation-based
route, through variation in the retrieval and consideration of brands” (p.
273). He suggests a memory-based choice depending on brand accessibility:
for a brand to be included in the CS, the consumer must recall that brand
and fail to recall other brands that might otherwise be preferred.

This chapter focused on the evolution of consideration sets, that is, sets of
alternative brands that are considered by a consumer in a purchase situ-
ation. The emerging typology of Table 14.1 may be paralleled with Um
and Crompton’s (1990), and Woodside and Lysonski’s (1989) typologies.
To some extent, it can also be compared with traditional conceptualiza-
tions by Brisoux and Laroche (1980), Howard (1977) and Narayana and
Markin (1975). These authors propose three typical sequential stages,
namely the brand-consideration stage (awareness set), the brand-evaluation
stage (evoked set) and the choice stage (single choice). Our emerging con-
ceptualization of Figure 14.1 is a little more subtle. It indicates that, to a
large extent, final choice is constraint driven. Moreover, opportunities are
responsible for the appearance of new destination alternatives that may be
finally chosen. The evoked set itself is composed either of alternative desti-
nations or of destinations in combination. This chapter also showed that
the number of destinations is quite stable over time and ranges from zero
to four with means close to two destinations/DMU (1.5/plan). Finally, the
CS perspective used in this chapter highlights the a-temporality of vacation
DM: more vacation projects with different consideration sets coexist in the
vacationer’s mind. More projects are considered at the same time with dif-
ferent time horizons, multiple DMUs etc. Therefore, isolating well-defined
192 A. Decrop
stages in DM processes is difficult and may even be irrelevant. Vacation
proves to be a timeless product where thinking, dreaming, talking about
vacation and gathering information is ongoing.
From a managerial perspective, tourism professionals are likely to make
better predictions from choice models that recognize different types of sets
rather than focusing on the consideration (evoked) set only. Managers and
marketers should try to develop effective plans and actions in order to assist
with the transfer of their brands from the dream or unavailable set into the
available set of their target customers. The cruise industry has made such
efforts these last years in order to change the perception that a cruise is an
expensive elite product that only rich people can afford. Prices have been
lowered, distribution channels have been extended and family-friendly pack-
ages have been offered. Furthermore, destination managers should make
sure that their country, region or city is part of vacationers’ alternative/sur-
rogate set of destinations. For example, a message such as “why not
Britain?” could be used in advertisments to target continental European
vacationers who may choose Britain as a surrogate destination if they realize
that they lack time or money for a long-haul holiday. Moreover, travel
agents should not overwhelm vacationers with too many propositions and
alternatives since destination CS appear to have limited sizes. Finally, the
dynamism and timelessness of many CS should be incorporated in market-
ing strategies and decisions: most vacationers are involved in more vacation
projects at the same time with different needs, desires and expectations.
As to the study’s limitations, one should remember that emerging results
are qualitative and interpretative. While bringing new light on the forma-
tion process of CS, the theoretical propositions developed in this chapter
should be tested on large samples using inferential statistics in order to
come to conclusive statements. Moreover, a series of factors influencing
the formation of CS should be investigated in more depth, such as the con-
textual variables mentioned in Figure 14.1. For example, the length and
type of trip may affect the level of planning and hence CS. A long-distance
trip could increase the research requirements and thus lower the number of
choice sets when compared with a short-distance trip. Another possible
extension of this research would be to focus on choice heuristics and strat-
egies behind the formation of CS. Decrop and Snelders (2004) did already
step forward in that direction by examining a series of rules that are used
in vacation planning and evaluation processes.
References
Ankomah, P., Crompton, J. & Baker, D. (1996). Influence of cognitive distance in
vacation choice. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 138–150.
Belonax, J. A. & Mittelstaedt, R. A. (1978). Evoked set size as a function of
number of choice criterion and information variability. Advances in Consumer
Research, 5, 48–51.
Botha, C., Crompton, J. & Kim, S. (1999). Developing a revised competitive
position for Sun/Lost City, South Africa. Journal of Travel Research, 37,
341–352.
Brisoux, J. E. & Laroche, M. (1980). A proposed consumer strategy of simplifica-
tion for categorising brands. In J. D. Summey & R. D. Taylor (Eds.), Evolving
marketing thought for 1980: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Southern
Marketing Association (pp. 112–114). Carbondale, IL: Southern Marketing
Association.
Bronner, F. & de Hoog, R. (1985). A recipe for mixing decision ingredients. Euro-
pean Research, 13, 109–115.
Crompton, J. (1992). Structure of vacation destination choice sets. Annals of
Tourism Research, 19, 420–434.
Crompton, J. & Ankomah, P. (1993). Choice set propositions in destination
decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 20, 461–476.
Decrop, A. & Snelders, D. (2004). Planning the summer vacation: An adaptable
and opportunistic process. Annals of Tourism Research, 31, 1008–1030.
Decrop, A. & Snelders, D. (2005). A grounded typology of vacation decision
making. Tourism Management, 26, 121–132.
Engel, J. F., Kollat, D. T. & Blackwell, R. D. (1973). Consumer behavior. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Fournier, S. & Mick, D. G. (1999). Rediscovering satisfaction. Journal of Market-
ing, 63, 5–23.
Goodall, B. (1991). Understanding holiday choice. In C. P. Cooper (Ed.), Progress
in tourism, recreation and hospitality management (Vol. 3, pp. 59–77). London:
Belhaven Press.
Harrison-Hill, T. (2001). Breaking the rules: Cognitive distance, choice sets and
long-haul destinations. In J. A. Mazanec, G. I. Crouch, A. G. Woodside & J. R.
Brent Ritchie (Eds.), Consumer psychology of travel, hospitality and leisure (Vol.
2, pp. 33–48). London: CAB International.
Hauser, J. R. & Wernerfelt, B. (1990). An evaluation cost model of consideration
sets. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 393–408.
Hong, S.-K., Kim, J.-H., Jang, H. & Lee, S. (2006). The roles of categorization,
affective image and constraints on destination choice: An application of the
NMNL model. Tourism Management, 27, 750–761.
Howard, J. A. (1977). Consumer behavior: An application of theory. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Howard, J. A. & Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. New York:
John Wiley and Sons.
Lavidge, R. J. & Steiner G. A. (1961). A model for predictive measurements of
advertising effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 25(October), 59–62.
Mathieson, A. & Wall, G. (1982). Tourism: Economic, physical and social impacts.
Harlow: Longman.
Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer behaviour in tourism. European Journal of Mar-
keting, 21, 2–44.
Narayana, C. L. & Markin, R. J. (1975). Consumer behavior and product per-
formance: An alternative conceptualization. Journal of Marketing, 39(Fall), 1–6.
Nedungadi, P. (1990). Recall and consumer consideration sets: Influencing choice
without altering brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 17,
263–276.
194 A. Decrop
Spiggle, S. & Sewall, M. (1987). A choice sets model of retail selection. Journal of
Marketing, 51, 97–111.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory
procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.
Thompson, J. R. & Cooper, R. D. (1979). Additional evidence on the limited size
of evoked and inept sets of travel destinations. Journal of Travel Research,
18(Winter), 23–25.
Um, S. & Crompton, J. (1990). Attitude determinants in tourism destination
choice. Annals of Tourism Research, 17, 432–448.
Woodside, A. G. & Lysonski, S. (1989). A general model of traveler destination
choice. Journal of Travel Research, 27(Spring), 8–14.
Woodside, A. G. & Sherrell, D. (1977). Traveler evoked, inept, and inert sets of
vacation destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 16(Winter), 14–18.
15 Risk perceptions and risk
reduction strategies as
determinants of destination
choice
Arie Reichel, Galia Fuchs and Natan Uriely
Introduction
The destinations that backpackers choose to visit and their typical routes
of travel are considered, among other things, as seminal characteristics that
distinguish them from mass tourists (Cohen, 1972; Elsrud, 2001; Maoz,
2005; Noy, 2004; Uriely, Yonay & Simchai, 2002). However, the literat-
ure lacks a systematic comparison of backpackers who travel to different
destinations. Such an inquiry appears to be useful, for example, in light of
the tourist destination’s conventional development process, in which a des-
tination that was initially associated with backpacking might be trans-
formed over time into a commercialized location associated with mass
tourism (Butler, 1980; Smith, 1978; Westerhausen, 2002). In this regard,
one might assume that the segment of backpackers who travel to less
developed destinations that are exclusively associated with backpacking
would differ in terms of attitudes and activities from backpackers who
travel to destinations that they perceive as more developed or commercial-
ized. Note that this assumption receives support in the segmentation of
backpackers’ within Australia (Loker-Murphy, 1996). In an attempt to
advance this line of inquiry further, the current study examines differences
between Israelis who went backpacking in South and Central America and
their counterparts in Southeast Asia in terms of destination risk percep-
tions and risk reduction strategies.
Previous research suggests that the imagery of the “Far East” (Southeast
Asia) among Israeli backpackers has been that of spirituality, involving the
activities of periods of sojourn in ashrams, passive relaxation on tropical
beaches and the use of drugs (Mevorach, 1997; Maoz, 2006, 2007; Noy &
Cohen, 2005). In contrast, South and Central American destinations share
an image of adventure-related sites that involve risky activities and extreme
sports in natural settings, such as jungle trekking and mountain climbing
(Noy & Cohen, 2005). In congruence with the prevailing orientation of
most backpacking research to rely mainly on qualitative methods, these
observations rely predominantly on the researchers’ impressionistic
interpretations derived from interviews and ethnographic data. Thus, a
196 A. Reichel et al.
systematic quantitative comparison between Israeli backpackers who
traveled to Southeast Asia vs. those who traveled to South and Central
America appears to be useful in an attempt to validate these observations.
Furthermore, such a comparison would shed light on the role of destina-
tion choice as a discerning factor and segmentation basis within the back-
packing population.
Literature review
The study area of backpacking was initiated with the conceptual differenti-
ation between institutionalized and non-institutionalized tourist roles
(Cohen, 1972). The two categories were further classified by Cohen (1972)
into organized-group and individual mass tourists within institutionalized
tourism, and into explorers and drifters within non-institutionalized
tourism. The term “organized-group mass tourists” refers to the least
adventurous kinds of travelers, whose excursion is entirely planned within
the “environmental bubble” provided by the tourism industry. Conversely,
the term “drifters” refers to the most spontaneous and unconstrained kinds
of travelers who tend to shun regular tourist routes and use a minimum of
tourism facilities in trips that are mostly unplanned. Tourists who comply
with either the explorer or the drifter tourist roles were referred to in the
literature by various terms: nomads (Cohen, 1973); youthful travelers
(Teas, 1974); wanderers (Vogt, 1976); hitchhikers (Mukerji, 1978); tramp-
ing youth (Adler, 1985) and long-term budget travelers (Riley, 1988). Since
the 1990s, however, most studies on non-institutionalized tourists tend to
address their subjects of research as backpackers (Elsrud, 2001; Loker-
Murphy, 1996; Loker-Murphy & Pearce, 1995; Noy, 2004; Noy &
Cohen, 2005; Maoz, 2006, 2007; Muzaini, 2006; Pearce, 1990; Scheyvens,
2002; Sørensen, 2003; Teo & Leong, 2006; Uriely et al., 2002).
The issue of travel risk is an integral part of the backpacking experience
(Elsrud, 2001; Gibson & Jordan, 1998a, b). In general, the tourism experi-
ence is prone to influence by specific factors, such as bad weather,
unfriendly locals, airport strikes, distasteful local food, terror, crime, polit-
ical unrest, disease and natural disasters that raise the level of tourists’ per-
ceived risk (Fuchs & Reichel, 2004, 2006; Mansfeld, 1992; Pizam &
Mansfeld, 1996; Reisinger & Mavondo, 2005; Roehl & Fesenmaier, 1992;
Seaton & Bennett, 1996; Sönmez, 1998; Sönmez & Graefe, 1998a; Tsaur,
Tzeng & Wang, 1997; Witt & Mountinho, 1995). Reisinger and Movando
(2005) utilized 13 travel risk perceptions ranging from cultural to equip-
ment/functional, financial, health, physical, political, psychological, satis-
faction, social, airplane hijacking, bomb explosion, biochemical attack,
and time.
Tourists’ perceived risk is also identified in the literature as a determi-
nant of visitation patterns in various destinations. In this respect, Sönmez
and Graefe (1998b) examined types of risk associated with international
Determinants of destination choice 197
travel. Fuchs and Reichel (2004) found destination risk perception to be a
multidimensional concept that varies across nationalities and cultures.
Reisinger and Mavondo (2005) demonstrated that travel risk perception
was a function of cultural orientation and psychographic factors. Studies
in the field of consumer behavior indicate that as soon as the consumer has
experienced a certain level of risk, his/her behavior changes, from delaying
the purchase, to using strategies designed to reduce the level of risk to “tol-
erable” (Mowen & Minor, 1998; Roselius, 1971). Among mass tourists,
Fuchs and Reichel (2004) found risk reduction strategies ranging from col-
lecting information from travel agents, friends and relatives, the Internet,
to making short trips and choosing popular destinations.
The issue of travel risk particularly associated with the backpacking
experience was the focus of several studies. For example, Elsrud (2001),
and Gibson and Jordan (1998a, 1998b), found that risk and adventure are
central to the construction of backpacker identity. In this context, it can be
assumed that searching for information on the selected destination from
various sources or consulting with peers would serve to reduce risk percep-
tions. These practices may boost confidence in the decision to travel in
general and about a choice of destinations, in particular.
Note that none of the studies on backpackers has yet employed quanti-
tative research methods to compare backpackers in a specific destination
with their counterparts in another destination in terms of behavioral pro-
files. The only exception is Locker-Murphy’s study that briefly mentions
destination choice within Australia. In addition, taking into account the
relatively limited empirical and quantitative research on the risk perception
of the backpacker experience, the current study attempts to identify the
various dimensions of backpacking experience risk perceptions. Given
recent indications of the growing heterogeneity within backpacking in
terms of motivation, risk perceptions, attitudes and personal characteristics
(Cohen, 1972, 1973, 2004; Maoz, 2005; Reichel, Fuchs & Uriely, 2007;
Riley, 1988; Uriely et al. 2002), it is assumed that the risk perceptions as
well as risk reduction strategies associated with the backpacking experi-
ence would be heterogeneous as well. Specifically, the study examines pos-
sible variations in risk perception of backpackers whose destination was
South America vs. the Far East. Moreover, it is assumed that risk reduction
strategies will also vary according to the destination of choice. The afore-
mentioned two destinations are the prime choice of Israeli backpackers
(Maoz, 2005).
In sum, the purpose of this chapter is to compare Israeli backpackers
who chose the Far East as their preferred destination vs. those who chose
to travel in South America. The comparison is conducted in terms of desti-
nation risk perceptions and the ensuing risk reduction strategies.
Methodology
To explore backpackers’ risk perception and risk reduction strategies, a
questionnaire was applied. The risk perception part of the questionnaire is
based on Fuchs and Reichel’s (2004) questionnaire, which measures tourist
destination risk perception. The questionnaire was adapted to the back-
packer segment through a series of in-depth interviews conducted by the
authors with 12 backpackers who at the time attended two major universi-
ties in Israel. The interviews were semi-structured, focusing on the back-
packing experience and on risk perception toward the trip and destination
chosen.
The final questionnaire begins with a clarifying question as to whether
the respondent has had a backpacking experience during the last three
years. This part of the questionnaire deals with motives for visiting the
last backpacking destination, such as visiting new sights, new experiences
and meeting local people. The next part of the questionnaire includes
questions about planning the trip and actual implementation, including
fellow travelers and modes of transportation and accommodation. Next,
the aforementioned questions about the risk perception of the backpack-
ing trip before it took place were included. The respondents were asked
about perceptions prior to their trip in order to assess their level of risk
prior to the experience, i.e., before risk reduction strategies were utilized.
The questionnaire also included information about past experience and
socio-demographics.
The backpacker-adapted questionnaire was tested for clarity on a group
of 16 students with backpacking experience. After minor modifications,
the final version of the questionnaire was ready for distribution. A group
of six tourism and hospitality management students were trained in admin-
istering questionnaires as part of a senior year seminar. The students were
closely supervised by the authors. The sampling method was similar to
snowball effect. The core group of backpackers was identified through a
call for participation in a study on backpackers posted at the authors’ insti-
tutions. At an early stage of data collection, it became apparent that back-
packers form a special bond that enabled us to contact numerous subjects
based on recommendations of fellow backpackers. Moreover, approxi-
mately half of the subjects were approached on the train, while on their
way to school. This informal non-random method yielded hundreds of
responses, as most of those who identified themselves as having backpack-
ing experience were ready to cooperate. The informal Israeli culture, as
evident during inter-city train rides, makes it simple to approach people
and ask for cooperation without a sense of intrusion. Note that the
response rate is impossible to estimate, as it was not clear who did not
agree to respond based on lack of motivation or lack of backpacking
experience. Nevertheless, the unusually large sample, total of 579 usable
questionnaires, gives a certain level of parametric statistic comfort. Out of
the total sample, 223 backpackers chose to travel to the Far East and 179
chose to travel to South America. These two destinations are the most
popular choice for Israeli backpackers (Maoz, 2005). Other destinations
included Africa and Europe.
Out of the 579 respondents, 302 (52.2 percent) were male and 277 (47.8
percent) were female. The average age was 25. The youngest was 19 and
the oldest 39. The respondents averaged 14 years of formal education.
Most of the respondents (94.6 percent) served in the mandatory military
service in Israel. Among those who served in the military, 204 (37 percent)
served in combat units. As noted above, 223 chose the Far East while 179
chose South America. These two groups of backpackers were compared
and contrasted regarding the issues of perceived risk and risk reduction
strategies.
According to χ2 tests, no significant gender differences were found
between the two segments. Among those who traveled to the Far East,
there were 120 men (51.5 percent) and 113 women (48.5 percent). Among
those who traveled to South America, 95 were men (53.1 percent) and 84
(46.9 percent) women. In terms of military service, 95 percent of those
who traveled to the Far East served in the military, compared to 97 percent
of those who traveled to South America. Accordingly, χ2 tests showed no
differences between the two groups. Similarly, examining military combat
experience indicates no significant differences: 37 percent of the Far East
group served as combat soldiers, compared to 43 percent of the South
America group. In terms of age, the average age in the Far East group was
25.2 with a standard deviation of 2.0, and the average age in the South
American group was 25 with standard deviation of 2.3. Clearly, the two
groups are almost identical age wise. The results also reveal that for 32.7
percent of those who traveled to the Far East, it was the first trip as back-
packers compared to 21.7 percent of those who traveled to South America.
Accordingly, the χ2 test results were not significant.
To examine differences between the two groups in terms of risk percep-
tion, a two-step analysis was carried out. First, risk perception dimensions
were identified by means of factor analysis. The second step involved a dis-
criminant analysis of the two groups. As noted earlier, risk dimensions
were measured based on Fuchs and Reichel’s (2004) destination risk per-
ception questionnaire. Specific questions related to the backpacking experi-
ence originating from in-depth interviews with backpackers were added to
this questionnaire. To extract perceived risks of the backpacking experi-
ence, a factor analysis was utilized, employing the method of Principal
Component with Varimax rotation. The treatment of the missing values
was done according to the Listwise option. A summary of the results of the
factor analysis are presented in Table 15.1. The cutting point of variable
Table 15.1 Backpackers’ risk perception: factor analysis results Varimax rotation
Factor Loading % of Cronbach’s Pearson

variance Alpha Corr.
explained
Factor 1
“Site-related physical” 10.53 0.81 –
Q37 Food safety 0.78
Q45 Food taste 0.70
Q38 Cheating 0.62
Q51 Acceptability of facilities 0.60
Q46 Crime 0.56
Q56 Diseases 0.55
Factor 2
“Socio-psychological” 9.18 0.72 –
Q57 Self-image 0.73
Q50 Way family thinks 0.69
Q44 Negative impression in the future 0.66
Q62 Way friends think 0.66
Q43 Effect on future success 0.61
Factor 3
“Physical harm” 8.92 0.77 –
Q41 Car accidents 0.73
Q61 Natural disasters 0.66
Q58 Injury 0.65
Q48 Terrorism 0.58
Factor 4
“Expectation” 8.13 0.79 –
Q66 Meet expectations 0.77
Q60 Dissatisfaction 0.77
Q67 M ake a mistake in choosing the 0.74
destination
Q55 Waste of time 0.56
Factor 5
“Socio-political” 7.96 0.72 –
Q52 Political unrest 0.69
Q54 Hostile natives 0.67
Q49 Strikes 0.63
Factor 6
“Financial” 7.38 0.64 –
Q40 Unexpected extra expenses 0.77
Q47 Impact on financial situation 0.70
Q66 M ore expensive than other 0.62
destinations
Factor 7
“Mass” 5.87 – 0.53
Q59 Commercialized 0.81
Q64 Crowded 0.77
Factor 8
“Behavioral” 4.67 – 0.24
Q63 Side effects of drugs 0.66
Q42 Negative impressions on locals 0.62
inclusion in a particular factor was above 0.5. Accordingly, 25 variables
were grouped into eight factors.
Factor 1, “site-related physical,” includes the questions that measure
food safety, food taste, cheating, acceptability of facilities, crime and dis-
eases. This factor reflects the risk perception that stems from visiting par-
ticular destinations and accounts for 10.53 percent of the variance. Factor
2, “socio-psychological,” includes questions that measure the compatibility
of the trip with the self-image, the backpacker’s image in the eyes of his/
her family, backpacker’s conduct during the trip and the way it might
affect his/her future, the way friends think of the backpacker and the
effects of the academic or professional delay on future success due the
backpacker’s trip. This factor accounts for 9.18 percent of the variance
and reflects the socio-psychological risk stemming from the backpacker’s
decision to take the trip.
Factor 3, “physical harm,” includes the questions that measure car acci-
dents, natural disasters, injury and terrorism. This factor reflects the risk
perception of possible physical harm and accounts for 8.92 percent of the
variance. Factor 4, “expectations,” includes questions about expectations
that haven’t been fulfilled, dissatisfaction with the trip, mistaken choice of
the destination and the trip as a “waste of time.” This factor reflects the
fear that the trip would fall short of the expectations, and accounts for
8.13 percent of the variance.
Factor 5, “socio-political,” includes questions that measure political
unrest, hostile natives and strikes. This factor reflects the fear of danger
that stems from the socio-political condition of the destination and
accounts for 7.96 percent of the variance. Factor 6, “financial risk,”
includes questions that measure anticipated extra expenses, impact on the
financial situation and the fear that the chosen destination would be more
expensive than other destinations. This factor reflects the financial risk per-
ception in selecting a particular destination, and accounts for 8.13 percent
of the variance.
Factor 7, “mass risk,” reflects the risk stemming from commercialized
and crowded sites. It accounts for 5.87 percent of the variance. Factor 8,
“behavioral risk,” contains the questions that measure the apprehension of
the backpacker related to drug abuse side effects and to the negative
impression his/her conduct might make on locals. This factor reflects the
fear of the possibility of danger due to the backpacker’s behavior. This
factor accounts for 4.67 percent of the variance.
The above eight factors account for 62.65 percent of the variance and
were utilized for the comparison between the backpackers who chose
South America vs. those who chose Far East (see Table 15.2). The compar-
ison between the risk perception profiles of each group of backpackers,
based on their destination choice, was carried out by means of discrimi-
nant analysis. The profiles provided by discriminant analysis serve as pre-
dictors of group membership. Specifically, a particular risk perception
Table 15.2 Discriminant analysis results of Far East vs. South America backpackers’
risk dimensions
Risk dimensions Standardized coefficients
“Mass” 0.49
“Socio-psychological” 0.46
“Socio–political” –0.28
“Financial” –0.27
“Expectation” 0.21
“Behavioral” 0.20
“Site-related physical” –0.08
“Physical harm” –0.02
1 – Far East backpackers N = 233 Centroid 0.18
2 – South America backpackers N = 179 Centroid –0.24
profile serves as a predictor of classification into the choice of either the

Far East or South America. Yet, these profiles might serve as possible mul-
tivariate characteristics of the two groups under investigation. Specifically,
while originally serving as independent variables aimed at predicting group
membership, in our case to one of two possible destinations, they can be
interpreted as “determinants” or “profiles.”
As demonstrated in Table 15.2, Far East backpackers are associated
with a profile consisted of “mass,” “socio-psychological” and “expecta-
tions” and “behavioral” risk dimensions. South America backpackers, on
the other hand, are associated primarily with “socio-political,” “financial”
risk dimensions. The classification results indicated 63.3 percent correctly
classified cases. Table 15.3 depicts the results of discriminant analysis
Table 15.3 Discriminant analysis of Far East vs. South America backpackers – risk
reduction strategies
Risk reduction strategies Standardized coefficients
Searching for information in stores and meeting 0.83

places of backpackers
Searching for information in travel guides 0.58
Searching for information on the Internet 0.45
Gathering information from travel agents 0.32
Gathering information from friends 0.28
Cooperative decision making 0.18
Consulting with people who had previously 0.14
visited the destinations
Limiting the duration of the trip –0.13
Reducing the cost of the trip 0.06
Avoiding dangerous destinations 0.05
Searching for information in magazines 0.02
1 – Far East backpackers N = 233 Centroid –0.24
2 – South America backpackers N = 179 Centroid 0.32
c omparing the Far East and South America segments in terms of risk
reduction strategies. As can be seen in Table 15.3, the Far East backpack-
ers are associated only with preference for shortening the trip. On the
other hand, the South America backpackers are associated mainly with
search for information in stores and meeting places of backpackers, from
travel guides, travel agents and friends and the Internet. They are also
characterized by making decisions cooperatively, and consulting with
people who had previously visited the destinations. The discriminate func-
tion correctly classified 64.8 percent of the cases.

The assumption of this chapter is that backpackers can be distinguished
according to their choice of a particular destination. In terms of the risks
associated with the backpacking experience, the South America segment is
characterized by socio-political and financial risks. The Far East segment is
concerned with masses, socio-psychological factors, unmet expectations
and behavioral risks. It can be argued that the former risk factors are rela-
tively easy to assess and even somewhat “objective.” In contrast, the latter
factors are highly subjective, focusing on the human dimension of the
backpacking experience: the perception of their behavior in the eyes of
locals, the chosen destination will be too commercial and crowded, dissat-
isfaction with the trip and the compatibility (or rather incompatibility) of
the trip with self-image. These psychological factors can be contrasted with
the financial or socio-political concerns of their South America destined
counterparts. These differences can be added to the growing, yet limited,
set of studies that illustrate that different psychological, cultural, psycho-
graphic as well as demographic dimensions of tourists are associated with
different patterns or profiles of travel and destination choice (Fuchs &
Reichel, 2004; Reisinger & Mavondo, 2005).
The comparison between the two segments in terms of risk reduction
measures is highly exploratory, as there is no body of literature that has
dealt with such issues before. The South America group is associated with
numerous means for risk reduction. They search for information in stores
and meeting places of backpackers, utilize travel guides and the Internet
and gather information from travel agents and friends. In contrast, the Far
East group cannot be identified by any particular means for risk reduction,
except possibly limiting the duration of the trip. This can be attributed to
two alternative explanations. One, the aforementioned risks associated
with the South America group can be actually mitigated and reduced
through the application of the given repertoire of risk reduction strategies.
However, the highly subjective and human-oriented risks associated with
Far East travelers can hardly be mitigated by utilizing external “hard data”
risk reduction strategies. A more internal psychological process of self-
assurance and conviction is possibly needed. Two, it can be alternatively
speculated that those who choose South America as their preferred destina-
tion are more “rational” decision makers, as indicated by their tendency to
plan their trip ahead of time and utilize numerous means of transportation
and accommodation to conform to different conditions (Fuchs, Reichel &
Uriely, 2007). Clearly, from a marketing perspective, it is relatively easy in
the South American case to supply the requisite information to relevant
marketing channels.
Note that the current study consists of four limitations that should be
taken into consideration: the use of convenience sampling, data collection
after their return from the trip (“ex-post-facto”), insufficient information
about expenditures and the focus on Israeli travelers only. Future studies
should attempt to relate to these limitations and attempt to have more
accurate information about spending patterns to gain better insight into
the economic and marketing power of various backpacker segments.
References
Adler, J. (1985). Youth on the road: Reflections on the history of tramping. Annals
Assael, H. (1995). Consumer behavior and marketing action. Boston, MA: South-
Western College Publishing.
Butler, R. W. (1980). The concept of a tourist cycle of evolution: Implications for
management of resources. Canadian Geography, 24, 5–12.
Cohen, E. (1972). Toward a sociology of international tourism. Social Research,
39(1), 164–189.
Cohen, E. (1973). Nomads from affluence: Notes on the phenomenon of drifter
tourism. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 14(1–2), 89–103.
Cohen, E. (2004). Backpacking: Diversity and change. Tourism and Cultural
Change, 1(2), 95–110.
Elsrud, T. (2001). Risk creation in traveling: Backpacker adventure narration.
Annals of Tourism Research, 28: 597–617.
Fuchs, G. & Reichel, A. (2004). Cultural differences in tourist destination risk per-
ception: An exploratory study. Tourism, 52(1), 21–37.
Fuchs, G. & Reichel, A. (2006). Tourist destination risk perception: The case of
Israel. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 14(2), 81–106.
Fuchs, G., Reichel, A. & Uriely, N. (2007). Backpackers’ behavioral profiles: An
empirical investigation, Ben-Gurion University School of Management, Working
paper # 12–2007.
Gibson, H. & Jordan, F. (1998a). Traveling solo: A cross-cultural study of British
and American women. Leeds: Leisure Studies Association.
Gibson, H. & Jordan, F. (1998b). Shirley Valentine lives! The experiences of solo
women travelers. Paper presented at the Fifth Congress of World Leisure and
Recreation Association, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Loker-Murphy, L. (1996). Backpackers in Australia: A motivation-based segment
study. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 54(4), 23–45.
Loker-Murphy, L. & Pearce, P. (1995). Young budget travelers: Backpackers in
Australia. Annals of Tourism Research, 22, 819–843.
Mansfeld, Y. (1992). From motivation to actual travel. Annals of Tourism
Research, 19, 399–419.
Maoz, D. (2005). Young adult Israeli backpackers in India. In C. Noy & E. Cohen
(Eds.), Israeli backpackers: From tourism to rite of passage (pp. 233–276).
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Maoz, D. (2006). The mutual gaze. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(1), 221–239.
Maoz, D. (2007). Backpackers’ motivations: The role of culture and nationality.
Mevorach, O. (1997). The prolonged journey after army [in Hebrew]. PhD disser-
tation in Psychology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.
Mowen, J. & Minor, M. (1998). Consumer behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren-
tice Hall.
Mukerji, C. (1978). Bullshitting: Road lore among hitchhikers. Social Problems,
25(3), 241–252.
Muzaini, H. (2006). Backpacking Southeast Asia: Strategies of “looking local.”
Noy, C. (2004). The trip really changed me: Backpackers’ narrative of self-change.
Noy, C. & Cohen, E. (2005). Israeli backpackers: From tourism to rite of passage.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Pearce, P. (1990). The backpacker phenomenon: Preliminary answers to basic
questions. Townsville: James Cook University of North Queensland.
Pizam, A. & Mansfeld, Y. (1996). Tourism, crime and international security issues.
New York: John Wiley.
Poon, A. & Adams, E. (2000). How the British will travel. Bielefeld: Tourism Intel-
ligence International.
Reichel, A., Fuchs, G. & Uriely, N. (2007). Perceived risk and the non-
institutionalized tourist role: The case of Israeli student ex-backpackers. Journal
of Travel Research, 46(2), 217–226.
Reisinger, Y. & Mavondo, F. (2005). Travel anxiety and intentions to travel inter-
nationally: Implications of travel risk perception. Journal of Travel Research, 48,
212–225.
Riley, P. J. (1988). Road culture of international long-term budget travelers. Annals
of Tourism Research, 15, 313–328.
Roehl, W. S. & Fesenmaier, D. R. (1992). Risk perception and pleasure travel: An
exploratory analysis. Journal of Travel Research, 30(4), 17–26.
Roselius, T. (1971). Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods. Journal of Mar-
keting, 35(January), 56–61.
Scheyvens, R. (2002). Backpacker tourism and third world development. Annals of
Tourism Research, 29, 144–164.
Seaton, A. V. & Bennett, M. M. (1996). The marketing of tourism products: Con-
cepts, issues and cases. London: International Thomson Business Press.
Smith, V. (1978). Hosts and guests. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sönmez, S. (1998). Tourism, terrorism and political instability. Annals of Tourism
Research, 25(2), 416–456.
Sönmez, S. & Graefe, A. (1998a). Influence of terrorism risk on foreign tourism
decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(1), 112–144.
Sönmez, S. & Graefe, A. (1998b). Determining future travel behavior from past
travel experience and perceptions of risk and safety. Journal of Travel Research,
37(4), 171–177.
Sørensen, A. (2003). Backpacker ethnography. Annals of Tourism Research, 30,
847–867.
Teas, J. (1974). I’m studying monkeys: What do you do? Youthful travelers in
Nepal. Paper presented at the Symposium on Tourism and Culture, Annual
Meeting of the American Anthropological Association.
Teo, P. & Leong, S. (2006). A postcolonial analysis of backpacking. Annals of
Tsaur, S. H., Tzeng, G. H. & Wang, K. C. (1997). Evaluating tourist risks from
fuzzy perspectives. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(4), 796–812.
Uriely, N., Yonay, Y. & Simchai, D. (2002). Backpacking experiences: A type and
form analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 29, 519–537.
Vogt, J. W. (1976). Wandering: Youth, and travel behavior. Annals of Tourism
Research, 4(1), 25–41.
Westerhausen, K. (2002). Beyond the beach: A biography of modern travelers in
Asia. Bangkok: Lotus Press.
Witt, S. F. & Moutinho, L. (1995). Tourism marketing and management hand-
book. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
16 Identification of important service
factors in group package tours
Yu-Shan Lin, Shu-Hui Chou and
Ya-Fang Hung
Introduction
In recent years, overseas travel in Asia is experiencing eye-catching growth.
From around the world, the number of Asian tourists is increasing, such as
Australia (Reisinger & Turner, 2002) and Guam (Iverson, 1997). Also, the
growth in Asia’s tourism population has also enhanced the attention of
scholars and tourism operators on Asian tourists’ travel behavior, espe-
cially the issues surrounding the travel behavior of group package tourists
and tour leaders (e.g., Lo & Lam, 2004; Quiroga, 1990; Wang, Hsieh, Yeh
& Tsai, 2004; Wong & Kwong, 2004; Wong & Lau, 2001; Yu, Weiler &
Ham, 2004).
Group package tour (GPT) implies that the tourist pays a certain price to
the tourist agency prior to the tour and the agency arranges all travel related
services, including those provided by tour leaders and local guides (Morri-
son, 1989; Sheldon & Mak, 1987; Wang, Hsieh & Huan, 2000). The
tourism business in Asian countries is fiercely competitive, and travel prod-
ucts’ service quality is one of the most important considerations when cus-
tomers choose among GPTs (Heung & Chu, 2000; Lo & Lam, 2004; Wong
& Kwong, 2004). The key to business success is intricately connected with
whether businesses can provide the notions of high service quality (Berry,
1986). Therefore, the travel industry’s dedication to raising service quality is
helpful toward sustaining existing customers and expanding new businesses.
Over the past two decades, the concept of service quality has been
widely applied and explored by scholars. In the research generated by
numerous leading experts, the most widely cited concept has been the
service quality scale (SERVQUAL) developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml
and Berry (1988). SERVQUAL was applied to different industries but
some scholars proposed that service quality scales should be modified
according to industry differences (Bowers, Swan & Koehler, 1994; Dab-
holkar, Thorpe & Rentz, 1996).
Meanwhile, the discussion of service quality has become popular in
tourism business, such as the travel industry, restaurants, hotels, airlines
and travel destinations (Albrecht, 1992; Fick & Ritchie, 1991; Lee &
208 Y.-S. Lin et al.
Hing, 1995; Ryan & Cliff, 1997; Saleh & Ryan, 1991). However, the scale
dimensionality of SERVQUAL appears to have a weak standing and the
five dimensions are not as distinct and independent as one would wish
(Llosa, Chandon & Orsingher, 1998).
In fact, incorporating the service quality theory into travel products is
difficult. Past literature on service quality only saw a part of the service
process (Swan & Bowers, 1998), but travel is a process filled with many
interpersonal interactions. Travel experience influences satisfaction and
service quality, the interaction between group members and tour leaders/
local guides would also affect satisfaction. Morover, GPT service puts
emphasis on totality, long processes and rich details. It requires the input
of many people in different industries such as hotels, airlines, restaurants
and transportation, to complete the task. An error in any one segment is
enough to break a tour.
Literature review
Reviewing the literatures about service quality, there are three kinds of
assessment scales for measuring in the past – SERVQUAL by Parasuraman
et al. (1988), SERVPERF by Cronin and Taylor (1992) and Non-Difference
by Boulding, Kalra, Staelin and Zeithaml (1993). The argument of
performance-based and perceptions-minus-expectations measure of service
quality has been last for two decades. Researches support that difference
scores should be avoided and conclude that there are serious problems in
conceptualizing service quality as a difference score (Babakus & Boller,
1992; Babakus & Mangold, 1992; Peter, Churchill & Brown, 1992).
However, the contributions made by Parasuraman et al. to figure out the
five dimensions of service quality have been widely applied in plenty of
service industries (Lam & Zhang, 1999; LeBlanc, 1992; Ryan & Cliff,
1997). As a result, this study adopts the views of Cronin and Taylor (1994)
to assess service quality with customers’ actual recognition.
The last decades have spawned a number of studies on customer satis-
faction. A key motivation for the growing emphasis on customer satisfac-
tion is that highly satisfied customers can lead to a stronger competitive
position resulting in higher market share and profit (Fornell, 1992). Cus-
tomer satisfaction is also generally assumed to be a significant determinant
of repeat sales, positive word-of-mouth and customer loyalty (Homburg &
Rudolph, 2001). When measuring the satisfaction, there are generally two
methods: (1) single item, i.e., having a single item to assess the overall sat-
isfaction, according to Day (1997), which supports the overall satisfaction
results after customer experience a product or service and (2) multiple
items, i.e., measuring individual satisfaction of products with a general
scale and summing up for the overall satisfaction. We agree with the views
of Day (1997) to take customers’ satisfaction as an overall concept and
such a variable will be used to assess customer satisfaction in this study.
Group package tours 209
Marketing managers routinely use purchase intentions to predict sales.
When managers and academic researchers rely on purchase intentions, they
hope, and implicitly assume, that these measures will be predictive of sub-
sequent purchases. This notion is a cornerstone of many theoretical models
of consumer behavior. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) wrote, “If one wants to
know whether or not an individual will perform a given behavior, the sim-
plest and probably the most efficient thing one can do is to ask the indi-
vidual whether he intends to perform that behavior.” Intentions constitute
a willful state of choice where one makes a self-implicated statement as to
a future course of action. For measuring the repurchase intention, inten-
tion to recommend to others and further buying are suggested by previous
studies (Homburg & Rudolph, 2001; Parasuraman, Berry & Zeithaml,
1991; Sweeney & Soutar, 2001).
In order to conquer the measurement problems associated with GPT
service quality, Wang, Hsieh, Chou and Lin (2007) developed an instru-
ment called GPTCCC (customer comment card for GPT). They were the
first to develop and empirically validate an instrument (scale) that meas-
ures the group package tour service by six factors including hotel, trans-
portation, shopping arrangement, optional tour, tour leader and local
guide. However, little attention has been paid to the development of an
informative and straightforward perspective that helps managers under-
stand what GPT tourists regard as the components of a satisfactory service
experience. How these elements can be better managed to improve satis-
faction and repeat businesses have received inadequate attention.
Customizing products according to consumer needs and improving on
the areas that tourists consider important are beneficial toward product
development and design. According to the investigation of this study, ten
of Taiwan’s major travel agencies launched a total of 1,810 GPT products
between September and October of 2006. This statistic highlights the wide
assortment of travel product categories. From the managers’ standpoint, to
identify where the customers are and what they want is vital. Only effect-
ive market segregation can ensure the more effective utilization of market-
ing resources. When carried out properly, segmentation can actually
enhance sales and profits.
Customer satisfaction is an important topic both for researchers and
managers because a high level of customer satisfaction leads to an increase
in repeat patronage among current customers and aids customer recruit-
ment by enhancing an organization’s market reputation. Proper customer
satisfaction research is likely to produce information on service attributes
that are considered important by customers, the relative importance of the
attributes in customer decision making and how well an organization is
currently meeting its customer needs.
To date, there have been limited studies on service quality evaluation
variables and their effect on satisfaction and repurchase intention. The
majority of past studies on GPT service quality focused in discussing
service attributes. However, managers are interested in the attributes that
significantly influence tourists’ satisfaction and repurchase intention. These
issues are profoundly linked to marketing and questions to which manag-
ers are urgently seeking answers.
Despite the importance of GPT service in the tourism industry, there is a
lack of empirical support regarding its effectiveness. For this reason, this
study applied GPTCCC with the purposes of (1) understanding how GPT
tourists assess service quality, (2) segmenting group package tourists in
Taiwan and (3) further analyzing what service attributes in GPTCCC
would significantly influence satisfaction and repurchase intention.
Methodology
The questionnaire consisted of three parts. In the first part, respondents
were required to rate the performance of 22 items in the six dimensions
proposed by Wang et al.’s (2007) GPTCCC scale. A 7-point Likert scale
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) was used. More-
over, six additional items (e.g., I am satisfied with the hotel arrangements
of my recent GPT) were used to measure the satisfaction of each GPT
sector (hotel, transportation, shopping, optional tour, tour leader and local
guide).
In the second part, to evaluate satisfaction and repurchase intention,
additional questions derived from literature were added. One item (overall
evaluation: I am satisfied with my recent GPT) was included to measure
the overall satisfaction (Homburg & Rudolph, 2001; Parasuraman et al.,
1991; Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). Moreover, as suggested by prior studies,
items such as intention of recommending the travel agent to others and
intention of purchasing future tours from the same travel agent were
included to examine repurchase intention. In the third part, several ques-
tions were incorporated to capture respondents’ demographic attributes
and travel behaviors such as departure date, travel agency, destination, fre-
quency of GPT travels, as well as dissatisfied GPT experiences.
The data were gathered over a period of three months. Adults aged 18
and above, spanning major cities of Taiwan, including the capital Taipei as
well as eastern, western, southern and northern cities were solicited to give
responses. According to client lists gathered from major travel agencies,
respondents were screened to ensure they had GPT experiences. A total of
2,600 questionnaires were sent out and 833 were found useable for reanal-
ysis (response rate was 32 percent). According to Fodness (1994), a
common heuristic in marketing research is to use at least five cases per
factor analysis item. The use of 833 cases to confirm a 22-item scale fell
comfortably in excess of this parameter. Results showed that among the
833 usable samples, 68 percent were female and 32 percent male. Most
respondents were between 21 and 40 years old (56.9 percent) and 38
percent of respondents were college graduates. Destination countries and
the GPT travel agencies that the respondents used were fairly well
diversified.
Exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation was conducted to create
correlated variable composites from the original 22 attributes and identify
a smaller set of dimensions, or factors, that explained most of the vari-
ances between attributes. The factors were retained if they had eigenvalues
greater than or equal to 1.0 and items were retained only if they had factor
loadings greater than 0.6. The eigenvalues suggested that the six-factor
solution with 22 items explained 80.63 percent of the overall variance,
which validated the findings of Wang et al. (2007).
In the second step, for verifying the reliability and construct validity of
the scale, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with maximum likelihood
estimation was then employed for parameter estimation (Jöreskog &
Sörbom, 1993). The results, together with some additional information on
reliability and validity, are summarized in Table 16.1.
A two-stage cluster approach was adopted (Punj & Stewart, 1983).
First, the Ward’s minimum variance method was applied to choose an
appropriate number of clusters and acquire the means. Second, K-means
clustering was used to cluster respondents into groups. As a result, the
most distinctive and optimal solution was derived from the two-cluster
solution. The first and second cluster accounted for 37.1 percent and 62.9
percent of the respondents, respectively.
To delineate the differences in GPTCCC items between the two clusters,
means and standard deviation for each cluster were calculated (Table
16.2), which provided summary information about the importance of each
service evaluation dimensions perceived by GPT tourists for each cluster.
For each of these evaluations, the mean scores of Cluster I were consist-
ently lower than those of Cluster II. Cluster I was labeled “easy traveler”
and Cluster II “quality traveler.”
The main use of discriminant analysis is to predict group membership
from a set of predictors. Discriminant function analysis consists of finding
a transform that gives the maximum ratio of difference between a pair of
group multivariate means to the multivariate variance within the two
groups. Accordingly, SPSS stepwise discriminant analysis was used to
identify and delineate the GPTCCC items that most effectively discrimi-
nated between Cluster I and II. Table 16.3 illustrates the results of the
summary statistics using 22 GPTCCC items as predictors. It indicated that
12 items were significant (p < 0.05). The variables that differentiated the
clusters the most were “The tour leader has professional ability,” “The
hotels have a sanitary environment” and “Duration in shopping stores is
appropriate.” The variables that differentiated the clusters the least were
“Appropriate arrangements for those who did not participate in the
Table 16.1 Results of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (N = 833)
Factor Items Factor Variance Individual Construct Average Coefficient

loading (%) item reliability variance alpha
reliability extracted
Hotel Sector 14.70 0.91 0.76 0.90

H1 The grade of hotel arrangement is appropriate. 0.77 0.66
H2 The hotels were comfortable. 0.87 0.65
H3 The hotels have a sanitary environment. 0.85 0.73
H4 The facilities of the hotel are good. 0.83 0.69
Transportation Sector 7.89 0.90 0.79 0.85
R1 The bus is clean and tidy. 0.89 0.79
R2 Safety of the bus is reliable. 0.91 0.74
Shopping Arrangement Sector 14.56 0.91 0.76 0.91
S1 Frequency of shopping is appropriate. 0.82 0.67
S2 Shopping stores fit in with the needs of group members. 0.84 0.77
S3 Shopping stores have good reputation. 0.77 0.77
S4 Duration in shopping stores is appropriate. 0.83 0.85
Optional Tour Sector 13.80 0.89 0.67 0.85
O1 Provided detailed descriptions of the contents of optional tours. 0.71 0.71
O2 The price of optional tours is reasonable. 0.82 0.68
O3 The optional tours are safe. 0.79 0.67
O4 Appropriate arrangements were made for those who did not 0.81 0.81
participate in the optional tours.
Tour Leader Sector 22.19 0.95 0.79 0.96
T1 The tour leader has good presentation ability. 0.81 0.79
T2 The tour leader has a sense of responsibility. 0.84 0.83
T3 The tour leader shows friendliness. 0.80 0.73
T4 The tour leader has an interpretive ability. 0.85 0.77
T5 The tour leader has a professional ability. 0.86 0.78
T6 The tour leader has the ability coordinate between group members. 0.81 0.78
Local Guide Sector 7.40 0.82 0.78 0.97
L1 Local guide has a professional ability. 0.85 0.67
L2 Local guide is skillful in group leading. 0.80 Total = 80.6 0.82
Table 16.2 Service quality evaluations for group package tours for two cluster
groups
Service quality evaluative items Cluster

I (n = 309) II (n = 524)
Easy traveler Quality traveler
Mean (std) Mean (std)
1. The grade of hotel arrangement is 4.50a (1.3) 5.75a (1.0)

appropriate.
2. The hotels are comfortable. 4.63 (1.2) 5.92 (1.0)
3. The hotels have a sanitary environment. 4.78 (1.3) 6.01 (0.9)
4. The facilities of the hotel are good. 4.40 (1.3) 5.67 (1.1)
5. The bus is clean and tidy. 4.38 (1.2) 5.70 (1.1)
6. Safety of the bus is reliable. 4.39 (1.2) 5.70 (1.0)
7. Frequency of shopping is appropriate. 3.49 (1.3) 4.95 (1.3)
8. Shopping stores fit in with the needs of 3.26 (1.4) 4.77 (1.3)
group members.
9. Shopping stores have good reputation. 3.60 (1.2) 4.92 (1.1)
10. Duration in shopping stores is appropriate. 3.18 (1.3) 4.70 (1.3)
11. Provided detailed descriptions of the 4.07 (1.4) 5.44 (1.1)
contents of optional tours.
12. The price of optional tours is reasonable. 3.68 (1.3) 5.16 (1.1)
13. The optional tours are safe. 3.98 (1.3) 5.34 (1.1)
14. Appropriate arrangements for those who 3.53 (1.3) 5.02 (1.2)
did not participate in the optional tours.
15. T he tour leader has a good presentation 3.73 (1.4) 5.85 (1.0)
ability.
16. The tour leader has a sense of 3.80 (1.4) 5.93 (1.0)
responsibility.
17. The tour leader shows friendliness. 4.00 (1.3) 5.90 (1.0)
18. The tour leader has an interpretive ability. 3.56 (1.3) 5.77 (1.1)
19. The tour leader has a professional ability. 3.55 (1.4) 5.78 (1.0)
20. The tour leader has the ability coordinate 3.75 (1.3) 5.86 (1.0)
between group members.
21. Local guide has a professional ability. 4.73 (1.3) 5.81 (0.9)
22. Local guide is skillful in group leading. 4.18 (1.4) 5.61 (1.1)
Notes
a 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree.
optional tours” and “The tour leader has an interpretive ability.” Overall,
96.9 percent of the group cases were correctly classified.
A series of cross-tabulations were performed to provide a complete
demographic profile for each of the two clusters. Chi-square statistical
analysis was then used to determine whether significant demographic dif-
ferences were present between the two clusters. Results revealed that age,
income and travel experiences differed significantly between Cluster I and
II. “easy traveler” (Cluster 1) consisted of 46 percent of travelers younger
than 30 years of age and their personal income per month lower than
C500 (44 percent). In fact, 35 percent of respondents in this group were
Table 16.3 Summary statistics of discriminant analysis using service quality evalu-
ation items as predictors
Service quality evaluation items Wilks’s Significance Discriminating

lambda ranking
1. The tour leader has a professional 0.542 0.000 1

ability.
2. The hotels have a sanitary 0.470 0.000 2
environment.
3. Duration in shopping stores is 0.423 0.000 3
appropriate.
4. The tour leader has the ability 0.393 0.000 4
tocoordinate between group members.
5. The price of optional tours is 0.377 0.000 5
reasonable.
6. The bus is clean and tidy. 0.366 0.000 6
7. The tour leader shows friendliness. 0.359 0.000 7
8. Local guide is skillful in group 0.353 0.000 8
leading.
9. Shopping stores fit in with the needs 0.350 0.000 9
of group members.
10. The tour leader has a good 0.346 0.000 10
presentation ability.
11. Appropriate arrangements were made 0.344 0.000 11
for those who did not participate in
the optional tours.
12. The tour leader has an interpretive 0.342 0.000 12
ability.
Notes
Eigenvalue = 1.921; canonical correlation = 0.811; Wilks’s lambda = 0.4798; df = 12;
significance level = 0.000.
students and their frequency of travel experience was less than three times
(66 percent). A total of 57 percent had travel experiences in Southeast
Asia, such as Thailand, Malaysia or Indonesia. In “quality traveler”
(Cluster II), 46 percent of travelers were aged between 31 and 39 years old
and 27 percent were older than 40. In addition, 56 percent had a monthly
personal income between C1,000 and C2,000 and 16 percent higher than
C2,000. Among these, 43 percent had traveled more than three times and
53 percent had traveled to Europe and America.
A series of stepwise regression analyses were then performed to predict
overall satisfaction by the six factors. Beta weights for individual factor
scores showed that all of the factors were significant predictor variables in
the regression model. The regression equation characteristics of overall satis-
faction (p < 0.000) indicated an R2 of 0.51, which suggests that the resulting
dimensions are, in fact, highly related to consumers’ perceived satisfaction.
Following this, this study also submitted 22 items to regression analyses
for further understanding the significant predictor items. Beta weights for
individual item scores revealed that when all items were regressed together
on overall satisfaction, eight out of 22 items were significant in the regres-
sion; the weight in ranking included “The tour leader has an ability of
coordination within group members,” “Duration in shopping stores is
appropriate,” “The hotels have a comfortable staying environment,”
“Local guide is skillful in group leading,” “The grade of hotel arrangement
is appropriate,” “Safety of the bus is reliable,” “The tour leader has a good
presentation ability” and “Appropriate arrangements for those who did
not participate in optional tours.”
This study also applied discriminant analysis on repurchase intention.
Given the large number of GPTCCC items, a stepwise method was used to
select items that demonstrated better discriminance. Then, general linear
discriminant analysis was adopted to derive the discriminant function. As
a test of equality of group covariance matrices, Box’s M (Box’s M = 77.41,
F = 5.113, and p < 0.000) indicated that the covariance was equal. After
calculation, one discriminant function reached significance; Wilks’ lambda
value was 0.63 (p < 0.000), and 81.3 percent of the original grouped cases
were correctly classified. Five out of 22 items were found to be significant
in discriminant analysis; the weight in ranking included “Tour leader’s
coordination ability,” “The grade of hotel arrangement is appropriate,”
“Shopping stores fit in with the needs of group members,” “Appropriate
arrangements were made for those who did not participate in the optional
tours” and “The tour leader has a good presentation ability.”

From the research results, we discovered that six items were related to the
tour leader factor and the interpretability reached 22.19 percent. This indi-
cated that the tour leader serves a very important role in terms of the
overall GPT service quality. That is, the performance of the tour leader is
the key to service quality. This finding conforms to the results of past liter-
ature that highlighted the significance of the tour leader (Agrusa, 1994;
Geva & Goldman, 1991; Mossberg, 1995; Wang et al., 2000).
“Shopping” and “optional tour” factors made up a large proportion of
the scale and the interpretability reached 14.56 percent and 13.80 percent,
respectively. In the past, service operators have not offered a detailed
design on the service performance of these components. However, as cus-
tomers’ travel experience is becoming gradually mature and they have
attained more understanding of travel operators’ GPT patterns, service
performance in the categories of “shopping” and “optional tour” has
become an important factor. To enhance service quality effectively, travel
operators must delve further into these areas, such as arranging for appro-
priate stopover times in shopping stores and giving detailed introductions
of optional tours. In addition, for destination marketing originations, the
study offers further understanding of the service items that customers per-
ceive as important.
In terms of Taiwan’s GPT market segregation, empirical results
show that a majority of GPT tourists (62.9 percent) find travel quality
important. Members of this group are older, have had more travel
experiences and belong to the higher-income bracket. Also, over half have
previous travel experience in Europe and the US. This is a contrast from
the past, in which tourists would choose to travel to areas closer to
Taiwan, such as Southeast Asia. This study reasons that Taiwan’s GPT
market is approaching maturity and customers are more sophisticated and
are more capable of traveling farther. In addition, although it is a popular
trend in Taiwan to use simple itinerary (e.g., ticket + hotel + city tour) in
GPTs, these programs still have room for development in terms of provid-
ing premium quality and good tour leaders. We recommend travel oper-
ators to customize product designs tailor-made to different customer
attributes.
Effective tourism marketing requires that managers understand not only
what they should do in a GPT service process but also how tourists can be
satisfied and make repurchasing decisions. Studies on the relationship
between GPT tourists’ satisfaction and repurchase intention are very
limited; to our knowledge, this study represents the first study that under-
takes an analysis on both dimensions. We found that four evaluation items
are comparatively important. These items all showed significant influence
on tourists’ satisfaction and repurchase intention. In particular, the effect
of “The tour leader has the ability to coordinate between tour members”
was most significant, followed by “The grade of hotel arrangement is
appropriate,” “The tour leader has a good presentation ability” and
“Appropriate arrangements were made for those who did not participate
in the optional tours.” The above areas provide managers with clear goals
to work toward, meeting and improving on.
References
Agrusa, J. (1994). Group tours in Hawaii. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(1),
146–147.
Albecht, K. (1992). The only thing that matters. New York: Harper Business.
Babakus, E. & Boller, G. W. (1992). An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL
scale. Journal of Business Research, 24(3), 253–268.
Babakus, E. & Mangold, W. G. (1992). Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital
services: An empirical investigation. Health Service Research, 26(6), 767–780.
Berry, L. L. (1986). Retail businesses are service businesses. Journal of Retailing,
62(1), 3–6.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. & Zeithaml, V. A. (1993). A dynamic process
model of service quality: From expectations to behavioral intentions. Journal of
Marketing Research, 30(1), 7–27.
Bowers, M. R., Swan, J. E. & Koehler, W. F. (1994). What attributes determine
quality and satisfaction with health care delivery? Health Care Management
Review, 19(4), 49–55.
Cronin, J. J. & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination
and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55–68.
Dabholkar, P. D., Thorpe, D. I. & Rentz, J. O. (1996). A measure of service quality
for retail stores: Scale development and validation. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 24(1), 3–16.
Day, R. L. (1997). Extending the concept of consumer satisfaction. Atlanta: Asso-
ciation for Consumer Research, 4(2), 149–154.
Fick, G. R. & Ritchie, J. R. (1991). Measuring service quality in the travel and
tourism industry. Journal of Travel Research, 30(1), 2–9.
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fodness, D. (1994). Measuring tourist motivation. Annals of Tourism Research,
21(3), 555–581.
Fornell, C. (1992). A national customer satisfaction barometer: The Sweden experi-
ence. Journal of Marketing, 56(1), 6–21.
Geva, A. & Goldman, A. (1991). Satisfaction measurement in guided tours. Annals
Heung, V. C. S. & Chu, R. (2000). Important factors affecting Hong Kong con-
sumers’ choice of a travel agency for all-inclusive package tours. Journal of
Travel Research, 39(1), 52–59.
Homburg, C. & Rudolph, B. (2001). Customer satisfaction in industrial markets:
Dimensional and multiple role issues. Journal of Business Research, 52(1),
15–33.
Iverson, T. J. (1997). Decision time: A comparison of Korean and Japanese travel-
ers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 16(2), 209–219.
Jöreskog, K. C. & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8 user’s reference guide. Chicago,
IL: Scientific Software.
Lam, T. & Zhang, H. Q. (1999). Service quality of travel agents: The case of travel
agents in Hong Kong. Tourism Management, 20(3), 341–349.
LeBlanc, G. (1992). Factors affecting customer evaluation of service quality in
travel agencies: An investigation of customer perceptions. Journal of Travel
Research, 30(4), 10–16.
Lee, Y. L. & Hing, N. (1995). Measuring quality in restaurant operations: An
application of the SERVQUAL instrument. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 14(3/4), 293–310.
Llosa, S., Chandon, J. L. & Orsingher, C. (1998). An empirical study of SERV-
QUAL’s dimensionality. Services Industries Journal, 18(2), 16–44.
Lo, A. & Lam, T. (2004). Long-haul and short-haul outbound all-inclusive package
tours. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 9(2), 161–176.
Morrison, M. A. (1989). Hospitality and travel marketing. Albany, NY: Delmar
Publishers.
Mossberg, L. L. (1995). Tour leaders and their importance in charter tours.
Tourism Management, 16(6), 437–445.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L. & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Refinement and reassess-
ment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(4), 420–450.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-
item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of
Retailing, 64(1), 12–37.
Peter, J. P., Churchill, G. A., Jr. & Brown, T. J. (1992). Caution in the use of
difference scores as marketing constructs. A. C. Nielsen working paper #91–2,
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.
Punj, G. & Stewart, D. W. (1983). Cluster analysis in marketing research: Review
and suggestions for application. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(2), 134–148.
Quiroga, I. (1990). Characteristics of package tours in Europe. Annals of Tourism
Research, 17(2), 185–207.
Reisinger, Y. & Turner, L. W. (2002). Cultural differences between Asian tourist
markets and Australian hosts, Part 1. Journal of Travel Research, 40(3),
295–319.
Ryan, C. & Cliff, A. (1997). Do travel agencies measure up to customer expecta-
tion? An empirical investigation of travel agencies’ service quality as measured
by SERVQUAL. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 6(2), 1–29.
Saleh, F. & Ryan, C. (1991). Analysing service quality in the hospitality industry
using the SERVQUAL model. Service Industries Journal, 11(3), 352–373.
Sheldon, P. J. & Mak, J. (1987). The demand for package tours: A mode choice
model. Journal of Travel Research, 25(3), 13–17.
Swan, J. E. & Bowers, M. R. (1998). Service quality and satisfaction: The process
of people doing things together. Journal of Service Marketing, 12(1), 59–72.
Sweeney, J. C. & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: The develop-
ment of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203–220.
Wang, K.-C., Hsieh, A.-T., Chou, S.-H. & Lin, Y.-S. (2007). GPTCCC: An instru-
ment for measuring group package tour service. Tourism Management, 28(2),
361–376.
Wang, K.-C., Hsieh, A.-T., & Huan, T.-C. (2000). Critical service features in group
package tour: An exploratory research. Tourism Management, 21(2), 177–189.
Wang, K.-C., Hsieh, A.-T., Yeh, Y.-C. & Tsai, C.-W. (2004). Who is the decision
maker: The parents or child in group package tour? Tourism Management,
25(2), 183–194.
Wong, C. K. S. & Kwong, W. Y. Y. (2004). Outbound tourists’ selection criteria
for choosing all-inclusive package tours. Tourism Management, 25(5), 581–592.
Wong, S. & Lau, E. (2001). Understanding the behavior of Hong Kong Chinese
tourists on group tour packages. Journal of Travel Research, 40(1), 57–67.
Yu, X., Weiler, B. & Ham, S. (2004). Cultural mediation in guided tour experi-
ences: A case study of Australian guides of Chinese tour groups. In G. R. Jen-
nings (Ed.), Annual Conference Proceeding of Research and Academic Papers
Vol. 16 (pp. 83–95). Michigan: International Society of Travel and Tourism
Educators.
Part V
Consumer experiences and

perceptions
17 Holiday resort visitor motivations
and their relationship with
satisfaction
Sara Campo and Joan B. Garau-Vadell
Introduction
The Balearic Islands are one of the most important holiday tourism resorts
of the Mediterranean. They are an archipelago composed of four major
islands, Mallorca, Menorca, Eivissa and Formentera. According to the
Spanish Tourism Studies Institute (Frontur, 2006), the Balearic Islands
attract 17.3 percent (approximately 9.6 million) of the total international
visitors that travel to Spain. Mallorca is the largest island and attracts the
highest share of international arrivals. Specifically Mallorca welcomed 79.1
percent of the international visitors to the Balearics. Germans (approxi-
mately 40 percent), followed by British citizens (35 percent) are the two
largest markets. International visitors have been increasing lately at average
rates of 1 percent yearly.
International visitors are classified by official tourism bodies according
to tourist motivations into four categories: “leisure/entertainment,” “work/
business,” “personal (such as health or family)” and “other motivations.”
This classification is rather poor and not very suitable and efficient when
we deal with resorts basically orientated to holidays such as Mallorca, a
tourism destination where, according to the local tourism ministry, 93
percent of its visitors have as a basic motivator leisure and holidays
(Inestur, 2007). Therefore, given the importance of tourism in Mallorca
and the importance that the island has on the overall Spanish tourism
industry, it seems reasonable to analyze deeply tourist motivations for vis-
iting the island, instead of simply grouping them under the rather obvious
and “low information” heading of “leisure.”
This research has therefore two basic goals; first to identify and classify
the motivations of tourists visiting Mallorca, and second to analyze how
these motivations influence their satisfaction levels. This research has been
conducted in a specific tourism resort, Mallorca (Spain). Some research
such as the one conducted by Kozak (2002) or the one by Nicolau and
Más (2006) analyze tourism motivations of Spanish visitors; however, they
do not take into account the relationship between motivations and one
of the most important long-term resort performance indicators – tourist
222 S. Campo and J. B. Garau-Vadell
satisfaction. We believe that in order to discover why tourists travel on a
certain holiday, it is crucial to identify first what the visitors are looking
for there. Also, through the analysis of the existing relations between
expected and obtained satisfaction, it may be possible to find out whether
the tourists have fulfilled their expectations. This information is basic to
tourism managers in order to point out what is to be improved and pro-
moted to favor a better and profitable image of the tourism destination.
Literature review
Tourist motivations have been referred to as “psychological/biological
needs and wants, including internal forces that arouse, direct and integrate
a person’s behavior and activity” (Dann, 1981; Peace, 1982; Uysal &
Hagan, 1993; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). These motivations are the first step in
the tourism buying decision process (Crompton & Mckay, 1997), since
they constitute the internal and external forces that drive a potential tourist
into action (Schiffman & Kanuk, 1978) and influence the destination elec-
tion (Eymann & Ronning, 1997; Fesenmair, 1988; Nicolau & Más, 2006).
Although tourism literature asserts that tourists have multiple motiva-
tions (see for example the literature review conducted by Kozak, 2002),
and authors such as Witt and Wright (1992), Uysal and Hagan (1993) or
Kozak (2002) state that tourism motivations vary depending on the differ-
ent segments of individuals and on the destinations they have chosen, it is
generally accepted that there exists a set of internal and external forces that
drive tourists to travel. These travel motivations were classified by Cromp-
ton (1979) into two main categories: push and pull. Push motivators refer
to internal individual forces such as escaping from routine, entertainment
or relaxation, and pull motivators refer to specific characteristics of the
destination, such as the environment, landscape, monuments, that may
attract the potential tourist. Push motivations are therefore related to
tourist desires, while pull motivations are related to destination attributes
(Cha, McCleary & Uysal, 1995; Dann, 1981; Oh, Uysal & Weaver, 1995
cited by Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Crompton’s model (1979) has been also
used to classify tourism motivations in the works of Bansal and Eiselt
(2004), Kozak (2002), Lundberg (1971) or Shoemaker (1994).
In a very similar way, Gnoth (1997) states the existence of two types of
motivations that drive tourists to travel: internal and external ones. Inter-
nal motivations are related to impulses, feelings and instincts, while exter-
nal motivations derivate from mental representations such as knowledge
and beliefs (Yoon & Uysal, 2005).
Crompton’s and Gnoth’s classifications start from the premise, largely
shared in the literature, that tourist motivation is a multidimensional
concept (McCabe, 2000). The first has been used by several authors in
order to analyze and generate a set of motivational factors that drive the
purchase of tourism products of different characteristics (see Guzman,
Visitor motivations and satisfaction 223
Lenes, Tapia, Wong & Castro, 2006; Kozak, 2002; Swanson & Horridge,
2006; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Nevertheless, research that analyzes tourist
motivations has not obtained a set of common factors that could be gener-
alized to different tourism destinations; they have rather obtained factors
highly dependent on the specific characteristics of the analyzed tourism
product.
The existence of different motivational factors may be explained
through the findings of certain authors such as Eymann and Ronning
(1997), Fesenmaier (1988) or Kozak (2002). These authors state that
certain variables such as the characteristics of the destination and cultural
and personal characteristics of the individuals influence motivation. In this
respect, and based on their results, this research proposes that tourist moti-
vation is a multidimensional concept, whose dimensions depend on the
characteristics of the tourist. From the point of view of tourism destination
management it seems essential to analyze and classify tourists’
motivations.
This analysis will allow the identification of what tourists expect from
the destination and also what is the relationship between the different
motivations and the satisfaction level of the tourist. This information, as
stated by Kozak (2002), can be extremely useful in order to target and
retain certain typologies of tourists with motivations that are associated
with higher satisfaction levels.
A large set of specialized literature in tourism has presented evidence
that motivation influences tourism destination selection (Eymann &
Ronning, 1997; Fesenmair, 1988; Nicolau & Más, 2006), tourist satisfac-
tion (Fielding, Pearce & Hughes, 1992; Mannell & Iso-Ahola, 1987; Ross
& Iso-Ahola, 1991) and loyalty (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). These two varia-
bles, satisfaction and loyalty, are good indicators of economic results for
the destination (Anderson & Sullivan, 1993). Altogether it gives an idea of
how important it is to have a clear understanding of tourism motivations
and their relationship with tourist satisfaction.
Tourist satisfaction can be defined as “the consumer’s fulfillment
response . . . it is a judgment that a product or service feature, or the
product or service itself, provided a pleasurable level of consumption-
related fulfillment” (Oliver, 1996, p. 87). Among the tourism literature, an
assessment of tourism satisfaction has been attempted using various per-
spectives and theories (see literature review by Yoon & Uysal, 2005).
Specifically, one of the most shared definitions of the term “satisfaction”
is the one contributed by Oliver (1980) in which satisfaction is “an overall
assessment of a service received in relation to what was expected.” This
definition describes how consumers evaluate their purchases through a
comparison between what they received and what they expected. This
model, known as expectation/disconfirmation has been used to measure
satisfaction on tourism related studies conducted by authors such as
Bowen (2001), Chon (1989) and Millán and Esteban (2004). Therefore,
subsequent purchase evaluations will depend on what the consumer
expected or on the motivation that drove their action.
In this respect, authors such as Witt and Wright (1992) or Uysal and
Hagan (1993) affirm that consumer motivations differ from one individual
to another, and this may cause a problem at the time to quantify satisfac-
tion globally. This is due to the fact that the satisfaction obtained from the
trip is related to the perceptions of motivation before the experience (Ross
& Iso-Ahola, 1991 cited by Bansal & Eiselt, 2004). This is to say that the
motivations are related to tourists’ expectations generated before the trip,
since they represent a prediction of the results that tourists will obtain at
the destination (Gnoth, 1997).
The relationship between tourist motivations and their satisfaction has
also been verified by several authors (e.g., Fielding et al., 1992; Mannell &
Iso-Ahola, 1987; Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991). Other authors such as Yoon
and Uysal (2005), explored the direction of the relationship, by carrying
out a classification of push and pull motivations and obtaining those moti-
vations that do not always influence satisfaction levels in the same direc-
tion, while push motivations had a positive influence on satisfaction, pull
motivations had a negative influence.
Therefore, the classification of tourist motivations and the analysis of
their relationship with satisfaction, will lead us to identify which motiva-
tions are the ones that generate higher levels of tourist satisfaction. In this
respect, this chapter, following the results obtained by Yoon and Uysal
(2005), aims to obtain and grade the tourist motivational factors that exert
influence on the tourists’ satisfaction level. In this way it is hoped that the
different motivation factors have a distinctive influence on the tourist’s
level of satisfaction (Yoon & Uysal, 2005).
Methodology
Specific research was conducted in one of the most popular tourism resorts
of the Mediterranean, the island of Mallorca. Following the works of
Guzman et al. (2006), Kozak (2002), Lundberg (1971), Nicolau and Más
(2006), Servert, Wang, Chen and Breiter (2007), Shoemaker (1994) and
Yoon and Uysal (2005), and in depth interviews with local tourism
experts, a list of 20 motivators was developed that may have driven the
tourist to choose the island of Mallorca as his/her destination.
This lists includes relaxation (M1), escape from daily routine (M2),
escape from home climate (M3), discovering nature (M4), sports activities
(M5), spending time with the family (M6), getting to know the island (M7),
nightlife entertainment (M8), special trip offers (M9), visiting monuments
and historical places (M10), discovering local gastronomy (M11), going
shopping (M12), getting to know different things (M13), cheap drink prices
(M14), taking care of health (M15), resting (M16), meeting other people
(M17), being entertained (M18), having an erotic flirt (M19) and escaping
from pollution (M20). These motivations include push factors (such as relax
or escape), pull factors (such as getting to know the island or visiting mon-
uments and historical places) and specific characteristics of the destination
that might be attractive to a large set of tourists such as nightlife entertain-
ment, gastronomy or drink prices.
Second, in order to classify the motivations of the visitor to Mallorca,
empirical research was conducted. A random sample of 585 tourists who
visited Mallorca in January, February, March and April 2004, were given
a personal interview before leaving the island. The interviewees were ran-
domly selected at the airport boarding gate prior to their departure. In
order to avoid a possible bias arising from interviewees with a common
geographical origin, no more than six interviews were conducted per flight.
Once the questionnaires had been collected and checked to see whether
they had been correctly filled in a total number of 529 valid questionnaires
was obtained, with a sample error of 4.3 percent and a significance level of
95.5 percent.
The questionnaire was structured into three parts. The first one included
the 20 identified motivation items at the exploratory stage of the research.
These items were measured on a 10-point scale from 1 (very little importance)
to 10 (extremely important). The second part included one question aimed to
measure the overall global tourist satisfaction that was also measured on a
10-point scale from 1 (very unsatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied). Finally a section
with classificatory socio-demographic variables was included.
The first stage of the analysis consisted of refining and classifying the moti-
vation scale of the tourist. In this respect a principal component factorial
analysis (PCFA) was conducted with the answers to the 20 items men-
tioned above. The PCFA allowed us to summarize the original variables
into a reduced set of factors lineally independent of each other and then we
were able to delete those items not explained by any of the obtained
factors. Following Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black’s (1999) recommen-
dations, items with communalities lower than 0.5 were deleted. These
items were: M3, M5, M6, M9, M10, M12, M14 and M20. Once the scale was
refined, four principal factors were obtained explaining 69 percent of the
overall variance (Table 17.1).
The four factors obtained are basically push type: factor 1, is made up
of motivations related to fun and entertainment included in variables M8,
M17, M18 and M19, factor 2 comprised items related to relaxation and
escape research (M1 and M2), factor 3 that included motivations such as
health or nature enjoyment, is composed of variables M4, M15 and M16 and
factor 4 consisted of items such as the knowledge and research of new
experiences included in variables (M7, M11 and M13. Composite means of
each factor (Table 17.1) indicate that the most important motivational
Table 17.1 Factor analysis findings
Factor Explained Composite

loading variance mean*
Factor 1: Entertainment/partying
Nightlife entertainment (M8) 0.82
Meet other people (M17) 0.70 25.27 3.80
Entertainment (M18) 0.80
Have a flirt (M19) 0.76
F2: Relax
Relax (M1) 0.82 19.97 7.41
Escape from daily routine (M2) 0.81
F3: Health and nature
Nature (M4) 0.68
Health (M15) 0.71 11.54 5.84
Rest (M16) 0.71
F4: Knowledge
Get to know the island (M7) 0.81
Discover local gastronomy (M11) 0.67 8.75 5.64
Discover new things (M13) 0.65
Notes
Extraction method: principal components analysis.
Rotation method: normalized varimax.
* 1 = Not at all important; 10 = very important
factor of tourists visiting Mallorca is to rest and relax (7.4), followed by

personal recovery and nature enjoyment (5.8). Unexpectedly, motivations
related to fun and entertainment had very low composite means (3.8).
The obtained principal factors were tested through structural equation
modeling and the Maximum Likelihood method of estimation. AMOS 6.0
software was used to conduct the statistical analysis. The results of the
relationship model confirmed the reliability and validity of the factors
obtained in the PCFA. Table 17.2 shows the indicator standardized loading
of the latent variable and the results of the indicator’s composite reliability
(CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE). The CR is an index of
internal consistency reliability. This will be high if the various items that
constitute the scale are strongly correlated with one another. The four
factors obtained in the analysis exceed the minimally acceptable level of
CR (0.70) recommended by Hatcher (1994, pp. 326–329). The AVE is an
index of validity and assesses the amount of variance that is obtained by
an underlying factor in relation to the amount of variance due to measure-
ment error. The factors again exceed the minimum value recommended by
Hatcher (1994, p. 331) of 0.50.
The results of the structural equation model are shown in Figure 17.1.
The proposed model fulfills Bentler’s (1989) conditions of adjustment.
First, the chi-square statistic has no significance (p = 0.32), second, values
Table 17.2 Reliability and validity of the latent variables
Latent variable Observable variable Lia Eib CRc AVEd
Factor 1
Entertainment/ Nightlife entertainment (M8) 0.82 0.32
partying Meet other people (M17) 0.69 0.52 0.86 0.60
Entertainment(M18) 0.80 0.35
Have a flirt (M19) 0.76 0.41
Factor 2
Relax Relax (M1) 0.82 0.32 0.80 0.67
Escape from daily routine (M2) 0.81 0.34
Factor 3
Health and Nature Nature (M4) 0.68 0.54
Health (M15) 0.71 0.50 0.74 0.50
Rest (M16) 0.71 0.49
Factor 4
Knowledge Get to know the island (M7) 0.81 0.34
Discover local gastronomy (M11) 0.67 0.55 0.76 0.51
Discover new things (M13) 0.65 0.58
Notes
a Li: standardized loading.
b Ei: error variance.
(ΣLi)2
c CR: composite reliability =  _______________
   
 
(ΣLi) + Σvar(Ei)
2
ΣL2i
d AVE: average variance extracted =  _____________   
 
ΣL2i + Σvar(Ei)
of GFI, AGFI and CFI are above 0.9 and close to 1 and finally the RMSEA
statistic is lower than the critical value 0.05.
The relationship model shows that the satisfaction variable depends on
the four motivational factors. As such, the study’s proposal regarding the
multidimensional nature of the tourists’ motivations is confirmed. In the
same way the results confirm that these factors have a different relation-
ship on the tourists’ satisfaction level obtained at destination.
The first factor F1, named “entertainment/partying” is composed of
motivations related to nightlife entertainment, fun, flirting and getting to
know other people. The tourists’ average motivation level toward enter-
tainment is currently low (3.8 out of 10) and has a negative and significant
effect on the tourists’ satisfaction. This may indicate that the tourists visit-
ing the island are not very motivated by these entertainment needs.
However, if the number of tourists visiting the island induced by these
motivators increased, or the importance of this motivation among current
visitors increased, it would probably cause a decrease in the satisfaction
levels obtained by tourists.
However, destination managers should be aware that if more tourists
with these types of motivations are attracted they will probably be
F1
�0.17*
F2 0.06(ns)
0.02(ns) Satisfaction
F3
0.38*
F4
Chi-square (35) = 38.31; p = 0.32

GFI = 0.99; AGFI = 0.97; CFI = 0.99
RMSEA = 0.013, *p < 0.05
Figure 17.1 Results of the structural equation model.

Note
GFI: goodness of fit index; AGFI: adjusted goodness of fit index; CFI: compasative fit
index; RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation.
frustrated and their satisfaction level will be low. Although some other
Spanish destinations may be characterized by better entertainment facilities
and therefore have a partying reputation, this is not the case of Mallorca,
mostly characterized by family, rest and relaxation environments.
The second factor F2, named “relaxation” is composed of the internal
needs of the tourist linked to relaxation and escape from daily routine.
Related to this, factor F3 named “health and nature” was obtained. F3 is
formed by motivations such as enjoying nature, health care or personal
recovery. Although the motivation level of tourists with respect to F2 and
F3 is high, the relationship model indicates that they do not significantly
influence tourist satisfaction. This finding may be a good indicator that
there are different consumer behavioral patterns with respect to the confir-
mation/rejection of their expectations. It means that those tourists that visit
Mallorca motivated by relaxation and health/nature expect to find these
characteristics at the destination.
However, their travel experience may drive some of them to confirm
their expectations and to another set of tourists to reject theirs, causing the
overall result not to be significant on satisfaction. We can therefore con-
clude that there is a need to go deeper into the analysis of the relationship
between these motivations and the obtained satisfaction, taking into
account the personal characteristics of the individuals.
Finally, a fourth factor F4 was identified and named “knowledge” and is
composed of motivations such as getting to know the island and its people,
enjoying its gastronomy and discovering new places. This factor is the moti-
vational factor with the strongest positive influence on the satisfaction level,
meaning that those tourists visiting Mallorca with motivations such as
getting to know the island and its people and discovering its local gastron-
omy and new things are the ones that obtain a higher level of satisfaction.
These results show that the motivational factors that drive tourists to
choose Mallorca as a holiday destination are principally internal or push
factors, rather than external or pull. Push motivational factors have been
grouped into four, with different effects upon tourist satisfaction. While
Yoon and Uysal (2005) found that push factors exert a positive effect on
the tourist’s satisfaction and pull factors a negative effect, this work has
obtained differences in the effect on tourist satisfaction depending on the
type of the tourist push motivator. The “knowledge” motivation exerts a
positive and strong effect on satisfaction, while the “entertainment/party-
ing,” “relaxation” and “health/nature” motivations exert respectively a
negative and nonsignificant effect upon satisfaction. These differences may
be due, as stated by Eymann and Ronning (1997), Fesenmaier (1988) or
Kozak (2002), to the specific characteristics of the destination analyzed.
This confirms the need to adapt Crompton’s (1979) classification to the
different types of destinations.
These are very useful findings for tourism destination managers since it
highlights the areas to focus on for resort promotional policies and strate-
gies toward emphasizing the destination attributes that have been tested to
fulfill tourist expectations. In the specific case of Mallorca, it may be of
interest to promote, apart from the traditional features of the island such
as the quality of its beaches or landscape, the island’s ability to surprise the
tourist with features such as the relationship with locals or the quality of
local gastronomy. In the same sense, it may be meaningful to focus mar-
keting strategies on attracting tourists with a “knowledge” motivation,
since these tourists are the ones that show a higher level of satisfaction and
therefore have a higher probability to develop loyalty patterns toward the
island (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Therefore, the motivational classification
allows destination managers to identify and manage different tourism
market segments according to their motivations (Beh & Bruyere, 2007;
Young, Leland & Feigin, 1978).

Tourism specialized literature states that tourist motivations have hetero-
geneous origins, meaning that there are multiple motivations that may
drive an individual to travel (Kozak, 2002). These motivations are also dif-
ferent depending on the specific characteristics of the destination (Eymann
& Ronning, 1997; Fesenmaier, 1988; Kozak, 2002). Thus, tourism desti-
nations should reveal which motivations have encouraged the arrival of its
tourists. In the same sense, the analysis of the relationship between the
tourist motivation and their satisfaction level is crucial to plan the market-
ing strategy of the destination.
Two main conclusions can be summarized from our research. First we
have delved into the analysis of holiday tourist motivations. While the offi-
cial (most extended) classification of motivation into “leisure/entertain-
ment,” “work/business,” “personal or family” and “other motivations” is
too broad and difficult to be applied to a holiday destination, this work is
more specific and contributes to revealing why tourists travel to holiday
destinations and what they are looking for there, which is a basic step in
order to satisfy customer needs.
Second, our work is a step ahead in the knowledge of the precedents of
tourist satisfaction, since it analyzes the relationship between holiday
tourist motivations and their satisfaction level. This analysis led us to
identify those tourist motivations that obtain higher satisfaction levels and
therefore it helps to manage tourism demands more efficiently. On one
hand managers may try to segment and focus on tourists with specific
motivations, for which they will obtain higher satisfaction levels. On the
other hand, the knowledge of the contribution of motivation to tourist sat-
isfaction allows the identification of marketing mistakes derived from inap-
propriate promotion and communication policies, maybe because
something that was promised was not offered at the destination or derived
from inappropriate marketing management, maybe because destination
services have not been able to fulfill consumer expectations.
The results of this work certainly advance knowledge of tourist motiva-
tions and their relationship with satisfaction. However, it probably suffers
from the fact that it has been applied to a specific destination. In order to
overcome this limitation it should be suitable to reproduce the work in dif-
ferent resorts with the objective of identifying a set of multidimensional
global dimensions that can be generalized to other areas. Also, we believe
that it is very important to analyze in depth the motivations of other types
of tourists, such as business tourists, spa tourists, etc. Finally, it could be
of great interest to analyze the role that tourists’ motivations exert on the
destination image and on the generation of loyalty toward that
destination.
References
Anderson, E. W. & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of
customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing Science, 12(2), 125–142.
Bansal, H. & Eiselt, H. A. (2004). Exploratory research of tourist motivation and
planning, Tourism Management, 25(3), 387–396.
Beh, A. & Bruyere, B. L. (2007). Segmentation by visitor motivation in three
Kenyan national reserves. Tourism Management, 28(6), 1464–1471.
Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS structural equations program. Los Angeles: BMDP Sta-
tistical Software.
Bowen, D. (2001). Antecedents of consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction on
long-haul inclusive tours: A reality check on theoretical considerations, Tourism
Management, 22(1), 49–61.
Cha, S., McCleary, K. & Uysal, M. (1995). Travel motivation of Japanese overseas
travellers: A factor-cluster segmentation approach. Journal of Travel Research,
34(1), 33–39.
Chon, K. (1989). Understanding recreational travellers’ motivation, attitude and
satisfaction. Tourist Review, 44(1), 3–7.
Crompton, J. (1979). Motivations for pleasure travel. Annals of Tourism Research,
6(4), 408–424.
Crompton, J. & McKay, S. (1997). Motives of visitors attending festival events.
Dann, G. M. (1981). Tourism motivations: An appraisal. Annals of Tourism
Research, 8(3), 189–219.
Eymann, A. & Ronning, G. (1997). Micro-econometric models of tourists’ destina-
tion choice. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 27(6), 735–761.
Fesenmaier, D. R. (1988). Integrating activity patterns into destination choice
models. Journal of Leisure Research, 20(3), 175–191.
Fielding, K., Pearce, P. L. & Hughes, K. (1992). Climbing Ayers Rock: Relating
visitor motivation, time perception and enjoyment. Journal of Tourism Studies,
3(2), 40–52.
Frontur. (2006). Movimiento Turístico en Fronteras. Instituto de Estudios Turísti-
cos. Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio: Gobierno de España (www.
iet.tourspain.es).
Gnoth, J. (1997). Tourism motivation and expectation formation. Annals of
Guzman, A. B., Lenes, J. D., Tapia, K. K. L., Wong, W. G. & Castro, B. V. (2006).
Segmenting motivation. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(3), 863–867.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. (1999). Análisis multi-
variante. Madrid: Prentice Hall.
Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor
analysis and structural equation modelling. Carry, NC: SAS Institute.
Inestur. (2007). Conselleria de Turisme, Govern de les Illes Balears (www.inestur.es).
Kozak, M. (2002). Comparative analysis of tourist motivations by nationality and
destinations. Tourism Management, 23(3), 221–232.
Lundberg, D. E. (1971). Why tourists travel. Cornell HRA Quarterly, 11 February,
75–81.
McCabe, A. S. (2000). Tourism motivation process. Annals of Tourism Research,
27(4), 1049–1052.
Mannell, R. C. & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1987). Psychological nature of leisure and
tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 14(2), 314–331.
Millán, A. & Esteban, A. (2004). Development of a multiple-item scale for measur-
ing customer satisfaction in travel agencies services. Tourism Management,
25(5), 533–546.
Nicolau, J. L. & Más, F. J. (2006). The influence of distance and prices on the
choice of tourist destinations: The moderating role of motivations. Tourism
Management, 27(5), 982–996.
Oh, H. C., Uysal, M. & Weaver, P. (1995). Product bundles and market segments
based on travel motivations: A canonical correlation approach. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 14(2), 123–137.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of sat-
isfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469.
Oliver, R. L. (1996). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Peace, P. L. (1982). The social psychology of tourist behaviour. Oxford: Pergamon
Press.
Ross, E. L. D. & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1991). Sightseeing tourist’s motivation and satis-
faction. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(2), 226–237.
Schiffman, L. G. & Kanuk, L. L. (1978). Consumer behaviour. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Servert, D., Wang, Y., Chen, P. & Breiter, D. (2007). Examining the motivation,
perceived performance, and behavioral intentions of convention attendees: Evid-
ence from a regional conference. Tourism Management, 28(2), 399–408.
Shoemaker, S. (1994). Segmenting the US travel market according to benefits real-
ized. Journal of Travel Research, 32(3), 8–21.
Swanson, K. K. & Horridge, P. E. (2006). Travel motivations as souvenir purchase
indicators. Tourism Management, 27(4), 671–683.
Uysal, M. & Hagan, L. R. (1993). Motivation of pleasure to travel and tourism. In
M. A. Khan, M. D. Olsen & T. Var (Eds.), VNR’s encyclopaedia of hospitality
and tourism (pp. 798–810). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Yoon, Y. & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and sat-
isfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management,
26(1), 45–56.
Young, S., Leland, O. & Feigin, B. (1978). Some practical considerations in market
segmentation. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(3), 405–412.
Witt, C. A. & Wright, P. (1992). Tourist motivation: Life after Maslow. In P.
Johnson & B. Thomson (Eds.), Choice and demand in tourism (pp. 33–56).
London: Mansell.
18 Building a tourist typology based
on motivations for visiting a
cultural city
Miguel Ángel Gómez-Borja,
Carlota Lorenzo Romero,
Alejandro Mollá Descals and
Juan Antonio Mondéjar Jiménez
Introduction
In recent years, the cultural tourism market has been a major growth market
worldwide (World Tourism Organization, 2005). This growth has been even
more acute in cities or historical landmarks declared as “World Heritage
Sites” by UNESCO. These cities are being considered as reference points for
the tourist as well as serving as the growth framework of urban tourism,
where this kind of tourism has a promising future (Troitiño, 2000). Tourism
is considered a way for accessing culture that, in turn, attracts tourism. This
growing interest in cultural aspects of the tourism products and services has
induced a fierce competition between potentially cultural destinations to
attract cultural tourists (van der Ark & Richards, 2006).
Under these premises, this research has two main objectives: first, to
conceptualize and measure the tourists’ motivations for selecting a particu-
lar destination and, second, to propose a cultural tourist’s typology based
on these motivational dimensions. To achieve these objectives we build
upon a theoretical base including the definition of cultural tourism and dif-
ferent conceptualizations of motivations in a tourism setting. The research
methodology is based upon two survey studies with data from different
years. Both studies show similar results regarding motivation dimensions
and tourists’ typology.
Cultural tourism: the concept

Probably we can find as many definitions related to “cultural tourism” as
authors writing about this topic. Although our intention is not to debate
about the nature and dimensions of cultural tourism, we will use some
definitions about cultural tourism and cultural tourist that will allow us to
fix the starting point for subsequent considerations. Hughes (1996) states
that the concept of cultural tourism is not linked to a resource but to a
motivation. We can, therefore, consider visits to museums and historic
234 M. Á. Gómez-Borja et al.
buildings or even to attend the performing arts, tourists “may want to
experience culture in the sense of a distinct way of life” (Hughes, 1996) as
cultural tourism. Then, we agree that the definition of what is “cultural”
depends on the tourist intents and motivations and, to a lesser extent, to
the activity itself. Considering this previous remark, will use a definition
provided by Vázquez (2005), who defines cultural tourism as:
To organize and make a trip with a proposal of territorial or thematic

content in order to carry out activities that allow people to experience
culture and other people’s different forms of lifestyle and, as a con-
sequence, to know and to understand their habits, traditions, physical
environment, intellectual ideas, and historical, archaeological, and
architectural places or another cultural dimensions.
Based on these definitions we can take into consideration some funda-

mental issues. First, there are a wide variety of resources that can be con-
sidered as cultural. Then it is possible to include religious and historical
buildings, historic urban centres and different kinds of monuments. These
resources have been referred as the basis for the “heritage tourism”
(Hughes, 1996). Besides historical resources, we can consider cultural facil-
ities. In this sense, the “arts tourism” would include attending museums,
art galleries, historical “resorts”, theatres, etc.
Besides the physical resources and their derived experiences, the idea of
experiencing culture as a different “way of life” or “soaking” of the cul-
tural identity from a specific area, can be seen as an interesting dimension
of cultural tourism too. In this sense, all tourism experiences have an ingre-
dient of cultural tourism.
Finally, it is possible to identify a wide range of motivations and drives
behind the different dimensions of the cultural tourism concept. Some of
these motivations can be based on cultural facilities while others are intan-
gible. Then, cultural tourism entails the participation and integration of
the tourist in any kind of cultural experience whether aesthetic, intellec-
tual, emotional or psychological that can be considered, in terms of Steb-
bins (1996), a form of “serious leisure”.
Around all these reflections, a common idea emerges. Although the
environment where the touristic experience takes place can guide the
tourist motivations, these motivations themselves define the nature of what
we can consider cultural or not. That is, cultural environment is a neces-
sary but not a sufficient condition to be immersed in an authentic cultural
tourism experience.
Visitors’ motivations
If motivations define the essence of cultural tourism, the conceptualization
and measurement of cultural motivations becomes a main research subject
Building a tourist typology 235
in this area. A relevant part of literature recognizes that many tourists are
more highly motivated to participate in cultural tourism activities than
others. In fact, different studies show that the desire to participate in activ-
ities related to cultural aspects is the main reason to visit a destination by
many tourists. However, for many others, cultural tourism plays a smaller
role in the decision to visit, and even for other people – who go to the des-
tination attracted by other motivations – these cultural dimensions do not
influence their destination choice at all.
Different reasons and motives have been identified as the basis for visit-
ing historical cities, demonstrating different kinds of behaviours and con-
sumption. Similarly, big differences have even been detected between the
“specific” and the “general” cultural tourist (McKercher, 2002; McKercher
& du Cros, 2003). We must highlight the evolutionary process experienced
by the tourist as consumer, from a “traditional” behaviour (e.g. homogen-
eous, gregarious, inexpert, sun–beach and price concerned) to constitute
nowadays other types of “new” behaviours clearly differentiated from the
traditional ones. Specifically, tourists are heterogeneous, spontaneous, sin-
gular, knowledgeable, pursuing other activities different from “sun and
beach” and worried about quality/price trade-offs (Esteban, 2005). This
evolutionary behaviour has supposed that the most traditional tourist clas-
sifications are turning into a wider and a more complex picture of the cul-
tural tourism market.
Within this complex picture, tourists’ motivations play an important
role in tourists’ perceptions and evaluations of destination sites. Recent
research has highlighted the importance of motivations (Andreu, Kozak,
Avci & Cifter, 2005; Bansal & Eiselt, 2004; Correia, Oom & Moço, 2007;
McKercher, Wong & Lau, 2006).
Extensive research on tourist motivation has come up in the last years
(e.g. Bansal & Eiselt, 2004; Correia et al., 2007; Gnoth, 1997; Kozak,
2002; Todd, 1999). Much of this research has been directed to conceptual-
ization while other research addresses measurement topics and tools (e.g.
Fodness, 1994; Todd, 1999). Other research analyses the effects of motiva-
tions on other cognitive and affective dimensions of tourist behaviours,
such as destination image (Beerli & Martín, 2004; Correia & Crouch,
2003; Correia et al., 2007). Most of these works have recognized that
motivations have a multidimensional nature and the fact that cultural tour-
ists have multiple motivations and could be classified and segmented
according to these differences (Andreu et al., 2005; Kozak, 2002). This
variability of motivations is due to the fact that motivations are context
dependent to specific destinations.
Andreu et al. (2005) propose different theoretical approaches to explain
tourists’ motivations that provide useful insights to conceptualize and
measure motivations. Two interesting ideas emerge from these theories.
First, based on general motivation theories and other research, motivations
can be split in two categories: social motivations, where vacation is mainly
stimulated by social or interaction drives and personal motivations, which
refer to self-recognition or self-actualization needs such as self-esteem, need
for knowledge or fulfilment. Second, since Crompton (1979), many
tourism researches (e.g. Correia et al., 2007; Kozak, 2002) have identified
what they call intrinsic and extrinsic (or push vs pull) factors or motiva-
tors. Push factors are originated and are referred to as psychological or
social motives that reflect intrinsic needs and desires of the tourist. Push
factors are related to destination benefits that constitute the global attrac-
tiveness of a given site. In this research we consider mainly a push
approach identifying dimensions related to psychological and social
reasons that drive tourist perception, attitudes and behaviours both regard-
ing social and personal needs.
Methodology
All research phases and activities were conducted in Cuenca, Spain. The
Historic Walled Town of Cuenca was declared as “World Heritage Site”
by UNESCO in 1996. Cuenca’s population was about 50,000 inhabitants
in 2006. Since 1998, tourist numbers visiting Cuenca have shown a signi-
ficant growth. In this sense, the evolution from 166,774 visitors in 1997 to
almost 350,000 in 2006 represents more than doubling the visitors during
this ten-year period. The city as a cultural resource can be defined as a
small cultural city where museums, monuments and heritage play an
important role. Beside this “cultural heritage”, the city possesses a privi-
leged natural environment and exceptional natural landmarks. In 2004,
the Observatorio Turístico de Cuenca (OTC) (Tourist Observatory of
Cuenca) was created. The project develops research on touristic activities
in Cuenca by analysing tourists’ behaviour as well as overseeing the poten-
tial of the tourism sector.
The data used to elaborate this work come from two sets of surveys to
visitors in different tourist information points in the city. Questionnaires
were auto administered in the tourist office and any doubt about the ques-
tionnaire was solved by the office staff. To elaborate this study the per-
sonal surveys were done during 2004, 2005 and 2006. For this research,
two different data sources were used. First, we developed an initial survey
where our main objective was to define and evaluate a large set of motiva-
tional variables. Second, we used data from a shorter and more general
survey that has been administered during the past three years as part of
marketing research activities of the OTC. For the initial survey, a final
sample of 300 visitors was used. Surveys from the OTC programme for
2004, 2005 and 2006 were merged and we obtained a final sample of
3,028 visitors. From now on, we will refer to the first one as Prestudy and
as Tostudy to the second one.
In the Prestudy, the main objective was to evaluate an initial set of poten-
tial motivations that the visitors could have when visiting the city. After
some interviews with professionals and local tourism managers along with
a literature review, an initial set of motivators was identified. A motivator
was defined in this case as a reason expressed by the visitors as relevant to
come and stay in the city. The first task was to reduce these variables to a
more manageable and meaningful set of dimensions. To achieve this objec-
tive an exploratory factor analysis was applied to the initial set of motiva-
tors. The results of this analysis can be seen in Table 18.1.
In the same way, motivators in Tostudy were considered. In this case,
the OTC used a shorter survey than in Prestudy research. They included
only seven motivators more related to their main managerial objectives at
this time. The results of the exploratory factor analysis for this set of vari
ables are showed in Table 18.2.
In both cases, motivation strength was measured using a 0 (total disa-
gree) to 10 (total agree) scale for each motivational statement. In accord-
ance with Table 18.1, seven motivational dimensions were obtained for
Prestudy data. The first component has been labelled as “experience of local
culture”. These dimensions represent the more cultural specific motivations
including local gastronomy, visit typical villages, watch landscapes and
interest for history. All those motivators are highly ranked too by visitors
and represent the highest percentage of explained variance. The second
dimension can be labelled as “physical/active entertainment” and it is
related with concepts such as night entertainment, doing exciting things,
doing physical activity or living adventures. It is worth noting that social
recognition is included in this dimension. The third factor is similar in moti-
vations to the second one but with more emphasis on social relationships,
which is why we have called it “social entertainment” in the sense that
includes aspects such as “enjoy with friends”, “meet people” and, at the
same time, the idea of enjoyment, entertainment and doing different things.
The fourth dimension is more general and related to depth experiences such
as expanding knowledge and discovering, and has been labelled “know-
ledge discovering”. The fifth dimension is related to other important city
attractions, i.e. its natural environment. In this case, “nature” represents the
important role that the natural environment has as a motivator base. The
sixth dimension, represents what has been called “quiet observation”. It
includes visiting monuments as an important motivator along with a quiet
form to escape from routine. Finally, a general motivator emerges related
with quietness and stress release that we have called “release stress”.
By the other side, based on data from Tostudy, three motivators have
been identified. The first one is “active entertainment”, including physical
activity and night entertainment. This dimension can be comparable to the
second dimension in Prestudy. The second factor is similar to “experience
Table 18.1 Factor loadings for Prestudy
Import Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Discover local 7.28 0.737

gastronomy
Visit typical villages 7.26 0.690
Experience new 7.86 0.684
cultures
Interest for history 7.35 0.620
Watch landscapes 8.42 0.593
Satisfy curiosity 6.67 0.546
Night entertainment 5.36 0.822
Shopping 4.55 0.778
Do exciting things 6.28 0.659
Social recognition 5.55 0.606
Physical activity 5.57 0.605
Live adventures 6.03 0.588
Enjoy with friends 7.33 0.747
Do something 7.69 0.624
different
Enjoyment and 7.61 0.612
entertainment
Meet new people 7.00 0.586
Expand knowledge 7.15 0.755
Discover something 7.49 0.725
new
Discover something 6.82 0.484
authentic
Enjoy nature 8.14 0.837
Learn from nature 7.04 0.627
Escape from daily 7.79 0.784
routine
Have a quiet 7.90 0.692
holidays
Visit monuments 7.99 0.667
Escape from 6.58 0.733
agglomeration
Release stress 7.67 0.593
Eigenvalues 10.03 2.54 1.57 1.25 1.13 1.04 0.98
% of explained 38.59 9.97 6.04 4.83 4.37 4.00 3.73
variance
% cumulative 38.59 48.56 54.6 59.43 63.8 67.8 71.53
explained variance
Notes
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy: 0.877.
Bartlett’s test of sphericity: approx. chi-square 2710.32, sig. 0.000.
Extraction method: principal component analysis.
Rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization.
Table 18.2 Factor loadings for Tostudy
Import Component
1 2 3
Night entertainment 4.13 0.865

Physical activity 3.24 0.626
Discover local gastronomy 7.40 0.755
Visit monuments 8.58 0.737
Visit typical villages 7.25 0.626
Enjoy nature 8.44 0.887
Relax 6.93 0.558
Eigenvalues 2.25 1.36 0.91
% of explained variance 32.22 19.42 13.03
% cumulative explained variance 32.22 51.64 64.67
Notes
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy: 0.648.
Bartlett’s test of sphericity: approx. chi-square 1191.03, sig. 0.000.
Extraction method: principal component analysis.
Rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization.
local culture” in the first study, to the extent that the same denomination
has been maintained in this case. Visiting monuments represents an import-
ant part of this dimension that was not integrated in its homologous factor
in Prestudy. Nevertheless, we think that the idea of specific cultural moti-
vations is present within this dimension. The third dimension could be
comparable to a mix of “relax” and “nature”. Considering the importance
of natural environment in this situation, this dimension has been defined as
“relaxed nature”.
Taking into consideration the above explanations, two main ideas
emerge. First, although Prestudy includes a larger set of motivational vari-
ables, both analyses are quite compatible, and similar driving motives for
visitors can be found. Second, although dimensions are conceptually differ-
ent, they are neither incompatible nor exclusive for specific visitors. Tourist
profiles including two or more of these dimensions as important motiva-
tors for their actions can be found too. In the next part of the chapter, a
visitor’s typology using these dimensions for the two proposed studies will
be proposed.
Once some descriptive data and motivations have been defined, the
focus will be on the analysis of the cultural tourist profile. The main
purpose is directed to obtain a segmentation of cultural tourists who visit a
specific “World Heritage City”, considering these motivational variables.
Using the previously calculated factor scores for the motivational dimen-
sions in the two studies, different clustering strategies and procedures were
run to see if we could obtain homogeneous groups of visitors.
As factor analysis, separate cluster analyses were run for the data from
the two studies. To assure as much comparability as possible, similar
procedures to both samples were applied. That is, first hierarchical cluster
analysis procedure was performed to decide the number of clusters to
retain. Results were not clear. A high percentage of both samples fall in a
broad “macro cluster”. On the basis of this information a K-Means Cluster
and a Two Step Cluster procedure were run. In both cases, the motivation
factor scores were used as clustering variables and a starting point of two
groups was selected. Results on cluster membership were similar, that is
because we used results from the K-Means cluster procedure to analyse vis-
itors’ typology and to compare both studies. Table 18.3 shows the cluster
sizes for both studies.
In Prestudy, cluster one (i.e. big cluster) represents visitors that scored
above the average on the interest of experiencing cultural traditions, phys-
ical entertainment and releasing stress. Cluster two, are above the average
on almost all motivational factors except social entertainment. Jointly with
motivational factors, we considered additional descriptive characteristics
to see if there was some specific profile for each cluster. In this sense, we
use some descriptive variables. Thereby, we did not find any clear relation-
ship between cluster membership and descriptive variables, except that
cluster two represents a higher percentage of first-time visitors. Tostudy
shows similar results. In this case, the big cluster is above the average on
“experience local culture” and “relaxed nature” factors, whereas cluster
two is located below the average on these factor scores. There was not any
significant difference on “physical/active entertainment”. Regarding demo-
graphic and behavioural variables significant relationships between cluster
membership and number of previous visits and stay duration were found.
Cluster two had a higher relative percentage of first-time and short-stay
visitors.
Table 18.3 Cluster size and characteristics
Prestudy Tostudy
Cluster CL1 73% 78.8%

CL2 27% 21.2%
Motivational Experience local culture Higher for CL1
factors Physical/active entertainment Higher for CL1
Social entertainment Higher for CL2
Knowledge discovering n.s.
Nature n.s.
Quiet observation n.s.
Release stress Higher for CL1
Physical/active entertainment n.s.
Experience local culture Higher for CL1
Relaxed nature Higher for CL1
Note
n.s. means that factor loadings are not significantly different for both groups.
Considering both studies, we can conclude that cluster one may repre-
sent “cultural tourists” and implicated searching for local and cultural
experiences with higher scores in almost all motivational factors. This
could be the more “uncontaminated cultural tourist” group. By the other
side, cluster two in both studies represents individuals that do not have any
particular outstanding motivation beyond general entertainment or enjoy-
ment. We can denominate this cluster as “incidental tourists”. Although
these visitors of course could have similar motivations, we think they are
not so strong as for “cultural tourists”.

The most important conclusions pertain to different motivational dimen-
sions of cultural tourists in a “World Heritage City”. First, motivation is
clearly a multidimensional construct. Visitors consider different reasons as
motives to visit and stay in the city. In this case, the motivation concept
refers to push or intrinsic motives. That is, dimensions reflecting inner vis-
itors’ desires or objectives to achieve during their stay. Nevertheless, these
motivators are strongly related to pull factors representing destination
benefits (e.g. release stress related to city quietness or expand knowledge
related to the existence of a wide offering of museums). Second, motives
differ in their depth and concreteness. Some motives are quite general
while others are more specific, and both kind of motives can explain the
same motivational dimension (e.g. experiencing local culture includes
motives as experiencing new cultures and visiting typical villages). Finally,
although we can define the analysed destination as a “culture and nature”
site, other factors emerge related to entertainment that were not related to
cultural or natural dimensions. In spite of that, some “convergence”
between push and pull exists. In this case, we identify as two important
motivators those related to “culture” and “nature”.
Regarding tourists’ typology using motivational factors, conclusions are
quite similar across the two studies. The main conclusion is that not all
visitors coming to an inherently cultural site can be labelled as cultural
tourists. Of course, the vast majority of visitors are represented in a
big cultural cluster whose members ranked above the average in almost
all motivational dimensions. Nevertheless, we have identified other vis-
itors that are less involved with cultural aspects. These tourists are more
entertainment oriented, and ranked below the average in almost all
motivational factors. It seems that they understand tourism as a way to
enjoy and meet people. Finally, conclusions in both studies are quite
comparable.
Some managerial implications can be drawn from these studies. Conclu-
sions can be useful both for private touristic business (i.e. hotels, restaur-
ants, touristic services) and for local tourism managers. First, it is
important for managers to know the motives that visitors assume to drive
their stay. It is important to know the relative importance of these motives
and the main dimensions that drive visitors’ behaviour. Second, market
definition and segmentation is a crucial task in any marketing plan. In this
case, visitors’ typology could help to define different kinds of tourists with
different motivations and provide insights about what kind of products or
services or even communication must be adapted to different groups. This
is especially relevant because main intrinsic motivations must be linked to
extrinsic or pushes factors to fill expectations and achieve visitor satisfac-
tion. Finally, it is important at this point that motivations and preferences
are not definitively fixed. Local tourist managers must think what values
or benefits are more relevant to promote. They must decide their position-
ing strategy based not only on what the market says but also on what the
destination could or should offer. To promote our “satisfactors” we must
know the main “motivators”.
Acknowledgements
We thank all the staff of the Cuenca Tourism Foundation and especially to
the executive director, Claudia Sevilla Sevilla, for her useful comments and
for providing data and other resources.
References
Andreu, L., Kozak, M., Avci, N. & Cifter, N. (2005). Market segmentation by
motivations to travel: British tourists visiting Turkey. Journal of Travel and
Tourism Marketing, 19(1), 1–14.
Bansal, H. & Eiselt, H. A. (2004). Exploratory research of tourists’ motivations
and planning. Tourism Management, 25(3), 387–396.
Beerli, A. & Martín, J. D. (2004). Tourists’ characteristics and the perceived image
of tourist destinations: A quantitative analysis. Tourism Management, 25(5),
623–636.
Correia, A. & Crouch, G. I. (2003). Tourist perceptions of and motivations for vis-
iting the Algarve, Portugal. Tourism Analysis, 8(2), 76–80.
Correia, A., Oom, P. & Moço, C. (2007). Modelling motivations and perceptions
of Portuguese tourists. Journal of Business Research, 60(1), 76–80.
Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism
Research, 6(October/December), 408–424.
Esteban, A. (2005). La demanda de servicios culturales: Aspectos motivacionales y
funcionales del consumidor de turismo cultural. In M. A. Gómez, J. A. Mondéjar
& C. Sevilla (Eds.), Gestión del turismo cultural y de ciudad (pp. 95–114).
Cuenca: Servicio de Publicaciones, University of Castilla-La Mancha.
Fodness, D. (1994). Measuring tourist motivation. Annals of Tourism Research,
21(3), 283–304.
Gnoth, J. (1997). Tourism motivation and expectation formation. Annals of
Hughes, H. L. (1996). Redefining cultural tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,
23(3), 707–709.
Kozak, M. (2002). Comparative analysis of tourist motivations by nationality and
destination. Tourism Management, 23(3), 221–232.
McKercher, B. (2002). Towards a classification of cultural tourists. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 4(1), 29–38.
McKercher, B. & Du Cros, H. (2003). Testing a cultural tourism typology. Journal
of Business Research, 59(1), 647–652.
McKercher, B., Wong, C. & Lau, G. (2006). How tourists consume a destination.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 5(1), 45–58.
Stebbins, R. A. (1996). Cultural tourism as a serious leisure. Annals of Tourism
Research, 23(4), 948–950.
Todd, S. (1999). Examinig tourist motivation methodologies. Annals of Tourism
Research, 26(4), 1022–1024.
Troitiño, M. A. (2000). El turismo cultural en las ciudades españolas patrimonio
de la humanidad. In L. C. Herrero (Ed.), Turismo cultural: El patrimonio his-
torico como fuente de riqueza (pp. 111–138). Valladolid, Spain: Fundación del
Patrimonio Histórico de Castilla-León.
UNESCO. (2007). World Heritage List. Retrieved 1 January 2009, from: http://
whc.unesco.org/en/list.
van der Ark, L. A. & Richards, G. (2006). Attractiveness of cultural activities in
European cities: A latent class approach. Tourism Management, 27(6),
1408–1413.
Vázquez, R. (2005). Recursos culturales y diseño del producto y la oferta de
turismo cultural: Importancia de las actividades de marketing. In M. A. Gómez,
J. A. Mondéjar & C. Sevilla (Eds.), Gestión del turismo cultural y de ciudad
(pp. 29–60). Cuenca: Servicio de Publicaciones, University of Castilla-La
Mancha.
World Tourism Organization (2005). Tourism market trends, 2004. Madrid,
Spain: WTO.
19 Effect of complaint management
on loyalty versus probability of
ending relationship
Leticia Suárez-Álvarez,
Ana María Díaz-Martín and
Rodolfo Vázquez-Casielles
Introduction
Since Berry (1983) introduced the term “Relationship Marketing” more
than two decades ago, customer retention has become a fundamental ques-
tion both in the marketing literature and for managers. Previous studies on
this topic have focused primarily on analysing behaviours oriented to
developing and maintaining relationships, but little empirical research has
been done on how an already established relationship dissolves. In this
study, we seek to extend the existing relationship dissolution literature by
investigating the impact of complaint management and trust on the proba-
bility of ending a relationship and customers’ attitudinal loyalty. In addi-
tion, the study also examines whether trust mediates the relations between
complaint management and these two outcome variables.
To achieve these objectives, we analyse the relationships that retail
travel agencies establish with their customers. An investigation of these
issues in the tourism industry is important for various reasons. First, the
tourism industry is of increasing importance in all developed economies.
Second, tourism services are heavily people based and may require various
interactions with the consumers and/or the coordination of different service
providers. Thus although tourism firms try to offer a high level of quality
in their activities, they are unlikely to be able to eliminate all service fail-
ures. Consequently, complaint management is an important part of their
daily routine. Third, complaint management is of strategic relevance as an
effective customer retention instrument (Johnston & Mehra, 2002;
Maxham, 2001; McCollough, Berry & Yadab, 2000; Stauss & Seidel,
2004). In the following, we define the key variables included in the study
and formulate specific hypotheses regarding the abovementioned
relationships.
Literature review
Establishing a relationship marketing strategy requires that firms consider
the creation of stable links as a long-term process that must be constantly
Effect of complaint management 245
monitored and managed. This is the only way successfully to develop and
maintain relationships, since one bad experience with a firm can encourage
customers to change their supplier and terminate their current relationship,
given the numerous alternatives available in today’s markets. Strengthen-
ing a relationship, transforming indifferent customers into loyal ones and
serving them individually, are not easy tasks. In the first place, the process
that leads to the establishment of relationships requires – if it is to result in
significant benefits – that both parties actually want such a relationship. At
the beginning of a relationship customers will be relatively uninvolved, and
will pay attention to their global satisfaction with the vendor to determine
their future participation in the relationship. As the exchanges between the
parties progress, the customers’ degree of involvement may increase, with
trust and commitment taking on central roles as mediating variables for
establishing future exchanges with the firm (Garbarino & Johnson, 1999).
According to Dwyer, Schurr and Oh (1987) the relationship formation
process is gradual and dynamic, and following Levitt’s (1983) marriage
analogy, three broad stages in the development of a relationship can be
identified:
• Courtship. First, customers try to obtain information about what each

provider offers. They can make a first test purchase, or obtain informa-
tion from third parties. At the same time, suppliers may try to obtain
information about potential customers to be able to offer them what
they specifically require and consequently be perceived as an attractive
option.
• Maintenance of relationship. Given their value, firms should make
efforts to retain current customers. As Dwyer et al. (1987) state, rela-
tionship maintenance – or commitment – represents an implicit and
explicit guarantee of the continuity of the relationship between the
exchange parties.
• Loyalty vs dissolution. At this point in the development of the rela-
tionship, two opposing possibilities present themselves: either continu-
ity in time (i.e. loyalty) or dissolution.
Gremler and Brown (1996) define loyalty as the extent to which cus-
tomers manifest repurchase behaviour with the same supplier, to which the
customer may show a positive attitudinal disposition and which, at the
same time, is the only supplier the customer considers when he/she needs
this service. Moreover, these authors distinguish between what they term
“behavioural loyalty” and “attitudinal loyalty”.
Behavioural loyalty is seen as the part of loyalty linked only to the pur-
chase behaviour. This type of loyalty equates with the repurchase act
(Tranberg & Hansen, 1986). On the other hand, attitudinal loyalty com-
prises, apart from the repurchase act, customers’ preferences and disposi-
tions with respect to a particular supplier. If this loyalty is present,
246 L. Suárez-Álvarez et al.
favourable word of mouth about the supplier is generated (Dick & Basu,
1994; Oliva, Oliver & MacMillan, 1992). Thus attitudinal loyalty can be
incorporated into a behavioural model as a result variable in opposition to
the probability of relationship termination, since attitudinally loyal cus-
tomers are fully convinced that the service provider chosen is perfectly sat-
isfactory for their interests, and do not contemplate defection.
The alternative to loyalty – relationship dissolution – has the opposite
meaning to it and can be defined as a condition resulting from relational
instability, where a number of characteristics come together to contribute
to an unsatisfactory evaluation, either anticipated or current, of the bene-
fits by the buyer or seller (Goods & Evans, 1999). Either of the parties
involved can terminate the relationship. In the current work we aim to
improve our understanding about how an existing relationship can turn
into a dissolved one after the customer makes a complaint.
Relationship dissolution has been related to the existence of service fail-
ures (Duck, 1981a; Halinen, Havila & Salmi, 1999; Keaveney, 1995), but
the link between a problem and relationship exit is not direct, since most
customers strive to get their problems resolved. Thus terminating a rela-
tionship is conceivably not a casual response to a single problem (aban-
doning relationships in the tertiary sector tends to involve the appearance
of more than one problem). Moreover, it is not the problem itself that
leads to dissolution (most consumers accept that things can sometimes go
wrong), but rather the service provider’s indifference or lack of response to
the failure that raises the customer’s propensity to terminate the relation-
ship (Duck, 1981b; Halinen et al., 1999).
Recovery strategies are, therefore, crucial to avoid relationship termina-
tion, and firms should ideally offer a solution before the customer even
notices the problem. But proactive strategies are less frequent than reactive
strategies, and hence complaint management has clearly become a key
concept in the analysis of relationship dissolution. In other words, an
effective complaint management system can be very beneficial for the firm,
since it positively affects customers’ trust in the company and it makes
consumers less likely to terminate an existing relationship (Fram & Calla-
han, 2001; Mittilä, Järvinen & Järvelinm, 2002; Smith, Bolton & Wagner,
1999; Tax, Brown & Chandra Shekaran, 1998).
Based on this evidence and on the results of a qualitative study carried
out through focus groups with frequent users of the services of retail travel
agencies, the conceptual model tested in this chapter (see Figure 19.1) pro-
poses that complaint management directly affects customers’ loyalty and
relationship termination probability, and that trust mediates the relations
between complaint management and these two outcome variables.
It is crucial for sellers to solve customers’ problems if they are to build
stable relationships over time with them (Tax et al., 1998). Morgan and
Hunt (1994) stress the complementary nature of the resolution of such
problems and the relationship strategy, given that in both cases interest
H1a (�)
Attitudinal
H2a (�) loyalty
Complaint H1c (�)
management Trust
H2b (�) Relationship

termination
H1b (�) probability
Figure 19.1 Conceptual model.
centres on customer satisfaction, on customer trust in the firm and on the

commitment between the parties. Lovelock (1994) stresses that the
information obtained through the evaluation of complaints is critical for
satisfying customers in the future, and consequently for the continuity of
the relationship between the parties. In short, complaint management con-
tributes to generating attitudinal loyalty, and prevents loyalty from being
manifested only in its behavioural dimension. All this leads us to formulate
the following hypotheses:
H1a: Customers’ perception that a firm is handling complaints ade-

quately increases their attitudinal loyalty to it.
H1b: Customers’ perception that a firm is handling complaints ade-

quately decreases the probability that they will terminate their rela-
tionship with it.
Likewise, Hart, Heskett and Sasser (1990) state that firms should be
able to learn from their mistakes to be able to implement actions that
avoid them in the future. This will consequently contribute to improving
customers’ trust in the organisation. Tax et al. (1998) propose that satis-
faction with the complaint management is also a determinant of trust. On
the basis of these arguments, we hypothesise the following:
H1c: Customers’ perception that a firm is handling complaints ade-

quately increases their trust in it.
Trust is one of the key variables for relational success. Indeed, much
research has analysed this concept as a fundamental element for maintain-
ing satisfactory relationships (Fullerton, 2005). Specifically, Parasuraman,
Zeithalm and Berry (1985) introduce the notion of trust as a critical factor
in successful relationships in the service industry. These authors suggest
that to gain customers’ loyalty and hence avoid exits, customers should
trust their service providers, feel confident in their dealings with them and
be sure that the information they provide will be treated confidentially.
Consequently, we formulate the following hypotheses:
H2a: The greater the customers’ trust in a firm, the greater their atti-
tudinal loyalty to it.
H2b: The greater the customers’ trust in a firm, the less likely they
will terminate their relationship with it.
In the next part of the chapter, we describe the methodology applied to

test the above hypotheses and then examine the main findings of the study,
before outlining in the conclusions that can be drawn from the results
obtained.
Methodology
To test the above hypotheses, information was gathered from regular retail
travel agency users by means of a carefully structured questionnaire. Data
collection was carried out by personal interviews upon leaving establish-
ments with a convenience sample of 750 individuals in three medium-sized
cities in northern Spain. A total of 741 valid cases were obtained after
screening. The selection of the participants was conducted upon leaving
the travel agency offices: a filter question was first asked to exclude indi-
viduals who were not frequent users of tourism services. The majority of
the respondents visit travel agencies once or twice a year (35 per cent and
25 per cent, respectively), generally to organise trips in Spain rather than
abroad (54 per cent of the respondents). Likewise, the distribution of the
sample relative to the consumers’ loyalty towards the travel agency reveals
similar numbers of totally loyal customers and those not loyal to a single
travel agency.
With regard to the socio-demographic characteristics, 53 per cent of the
respondents are women, 32 per cent belong to the age group 25–34 and
the most frequent interval regarding declared family income is
C1,201–1,800 per month.
The measures used in the investigation were sourced from a combina-
tion and synthesis of past studies and adapted to the specific context under
study – retail travel agencies – by means of in-depth interviews with
experts in the tourism industry and through focus groups with travel
agency customers.
Propensity to terminate the exchange relationship was assessed adapting
the scales proposed by Ping (1997, 1999), Mittal and Lassar (1998), Ala-
joutsijärvi, Möller and Tähtinen (2000), Elangovan (2001) and Mittilä et
al. (2002). To measure attitudinal loyalty a scale was elaborated based on
Young and Denize (1995), Garbarino and Johnson (1999), Price and
Arnould (1999), Beckett, Hewer and Howcroft (2000), Yoon and Kim
(2000), Lee and Cunningham (2001), Lee, Lee and Feick (2001), Mattila
(2001) and Sirdeshmukh, Singh and Sabol (2002). The trust scale was built
upon the research of Gwinner, Gremier and Bitner (1998), Selnes (1998),
Price and Arnould (1999) and Sharma and Patterson (1999). Finally, the
complaint management scale is an adaptation of the scales proposed by
Tax et al. (1998), Smith et al. (1999), Fram and Callahan (2001) and
Mittilä et al. (2002).
Before estimating the causal model we evaluated the unidimensionality,
reliability and validity of the measurement scales. Throughout this process
we used the statistics packages SPSS/PC version 13.0 for Windows and
EQS version 5.7a for Windows. To confirm the unidimensionality of the
scales we first conducted a principal components factor analysis with
varimax rotation. In all cases we detected the existence of a single dimen-
sion, as expected. In the case of trust we took into account the two dimen-
sions, credibility and benevolence, to build the measurement scale, and we
opted to use a single latent variable, in accordance with the exploratory
factor analysis results.
As a first step in evaluating the scale reliability, we calculated an index
to measure the reliability of each factor (composite reliability index). In all
cases this exceeded the minimum level of 0.60 recommended by Bagozzi
and Yi (1988). The scales employed in the present study were developed
using already validated scales, and the results of a previous qualitative
study were also taken into account to adapt them to the tourism environ-
ment. Thus the scales have content validity. To confirm the convergent
validity we calculated the lambda parameters that relate each observed
variable with the latent factor. In all cases these parameters exceed 0.5,
and are significant at the 5 per cent level. Finally, we estimated the confi-
dence intervals for the parameters indicating the correlation between the
latent factors, and confirmed the absence of 1 within them, thereby con-
firming the discriminant validity of the measurement scales used. In addi-
tion, the composite reliability coefficients (ρ), the squared correlation
between all pairs of constructs and the standardised lambda parameters (λ)
were also examined. Together, these tests provided evidence of reliability
and convergent and discriminant validity (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988).
Discussion on findings
The relations between the latent variables that appear in Figure 19.2 are
analysed by means of a structural equations system, using the EQS
program, version 6.1 for Windows. Results regarding the goodness-of-fit
indexes of the suggested model (see Table 19.1) are adequate, considering
the well-known clarification about the sample size in the chi-square test.
The null hypothesis of this test argues that the deviation of the estimated
variance-covariance matrix of the sample is due only to the sample error,
0.21*
Attitudinal
0.60* loyalty
Complaint 0.79*
management Trust
�0.47* Relationship
termination
0.03 probability
Figure 19.2 Conceptual model test.

Note
* significant at 5% level (t-value > 1.96).
Table 19.1 Goodness-of-fit indexes
Index Optimal value Model
χ2 (df) (p) p > 0.05 1851.70 (459) p < 0.001

S-B χ2 (p) p > 0.05 1365.9698 p < 0.001
BBNFI >0.9 0.902
BBNNFI >0.9 0.918
CFI High, close to 1 0.924
ROBUST CFI High, close to 1 0.936
IFI High, close to 1 0.924
GFI High, close to 1 0.847
AGFI >0.90 0.824
RMR Close to 0 0.095
SRMR Close to 0 0.042
RMSEA <0.05–0.08 0.064
hence the interest in seeking probability values of the statistic exceeding

0.05. Equally, we should mention the rigorous level at which the indexes’
optimal values have been fixed, since authors such as Jöreskog and Sörbom
(1993), Mueller (1996) and Dawes, Faulkner and Sharp (1998) consider
values exceeding 0.8 for the indices GFI and AGFI to be adequate. This
reaffirms the good fit of this model.
As regards the hypotheses formulated, the coefficients of the model
show that complaint management significantly affects attitudinal loyalty
and trust, but no significant effect is found on probability of terminating
the relationship. This provides support for hypotheses H1a and H1c, but
not for hypothesis H1b. For its part, trust has a significant positive effect
on attitudinal loyalty (H2a), as well as a significant negative effect on
probability of terminating the relationship (H2b), that together with the
acceptance of hypothesis H1c allows us to say that consumers’ trust in the
firm mediates the effects of complaint management on loyalty and relation-
ship termination.
To verify this mediating effect of trust we used the methodology sug-
gested by Maxham and Netemeyer (2002), which has been used in services
marketing research recently (Voorhees & Brady, 2005). To test the mediat-
ing effect four conditions must be met: (1) the independent variable (com-
plaint management) must affect the mediator (trust), (2) the mediator must
significantly affect the dependent variable, (3) the independent variable
must affect the dependent variable when the mediator is removed from the
model and (4) for full mediation to be supported, the direct path from the
independent variable must become insignificant when the mediator is
placed back into the model. According to the data, full mediation exists for
the relation between complaint management and probability of terminat-
ing the relationship, but mediation is only partial for the relation between
complaint management and attitudinal loyalty.
No causal relation between attitudinal loyalty and probability of rela-
tionship termination has been tested given that they are situated at the
same level (both are result variables) and they have the opposite meaning.
Thus there may be a certain degree of correlation between these factors
(aspect taken into account when testing the model) but no causality at all.

The relational approach has been widely investigated in exchanges between
distribution-channel members other than the end customer – a key focus in
the present study. Retail travel agencies are only just beginning to exploit
the relational approach with the end customer. This study examines how
complaint management affects relationship development. The central
research question has been to analyse whether the way complaints are
handled conditions consumers’ willingness to maintain a relationship or to
terminate it. Our results suggest that complaint management positively
influences customers’ attitudinal loyalty, both directly and indirectly
through trust. The case of relationship termination is different: complaint
handling does not have a significant direct influence on the probability of
terminating a relationship, although it does have an indirect and negative
influence through trust. Further research is needed to find out whether the
severity of the service failure or the type of failure (failure in the process or
failure in the result) would lead to a stronger direct influence of complaint
management on relationship dissolution.
To summarise, three major conclusions can be drawn from the above.
First, complaint management plays a key role in relationship development,
not only because of its contribution to strengthening customers’ trust in
their travel agency, but also for its impact on the results variables: attitudi-
nal loyalty versus probability of dissolution. Second, it is difficult to gain
customers’ attitudinal loyalty unless the exchange involves a belief in the
supplier’s good intentions. At the same time, the existence of trust dimin-
ishes customers’ propensity to terminate the relationship. Third, the lack
of a significant direct influence of complaint management on the probabil-
ity of terminating the relationship suggests that the antecedents of active
responses (breaking the relationship) are different from those of more
passive responses (maintaining the relationship). Other variables, such as
guarantees or perceived justice, may contribute to a greater extent to redu-
cing the probability of relationship termination.
On the basis of these findings we now offer some recommendations for
travel agencies to help them create a climate of trust between both parties
in the relationship. First, companies should have a good complaint-
handling system to detect any service failures that occur. In this respect,
establishing a properly defined system to listen to the customer would be
the ideal starting point to facilitate exchange of information with the cus-
tomers. This would help the company to define its future strategies more
easily, either to correct the problem or to detect and resolve it before the
customer makes the complaint (proactive strategy). The employees of this
type of firm have a particularly important role in this process, since they
are the ones that interact with the customers on a day-to-day basis. So,
travel agencies need an adequate internal marketing strategy to achieve
their customer goals.
Before concluding, we should mention two limitations of the current
work: its cross-sectional and retrospective nature. To test causality prop-
erly, a longitudinal research design would be necessary. Regarding the
second limitation, respondents had to recall a negative service encounter
that they had recently experienced and then answer questions concerning
complaint management, trust, relationship maintenance and ending. More
real-time techniques could be used in future research. Likewise, studying a
greater number of antecedents of the variables proposed here is another
possible future line of research.
References
Alajoutsijärvi, K., Möller, K. & Tähtinen, J. (2000). Beautiful exit: How to leave
your business partner. European Journal of Marketing, 34(11/12), 1270–1290.
Bagozzi, R. P. & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation model.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74–94.
Beckett, A., Hewer, P. & Howcroft, B. (2000). An exposition of consumer behavi-
our in the financial services industry. International Journal of Bank Marketing,
18(1), 15–26.
Berry, L. (1983). Relationship marketing: Emerging perspectives on service market-
ing. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
Dawes, J., Faulkner, M. & Sharp, B. (1998). Business orientation scales: Develop-
ment and psychometric assessment. 27th EMAC Conference, 5, 461–478, Stock-
holm.
Dick, A. S. & Basu, K. (1994). Customer loyalty: Toward an integrated conceptual
framework. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 22, 99–109.
Duck, S. (1981a). Toward a research map for the study of relationship breakdown.
In S. Duck & R. Gilmour (Eds.), Personal relationships 3: Personal relationships
in disorder (pp. 1–29). London: Academic Press.
Duck, S. (1981b). A topography of relationship disengagement and dissolution. In
S. Duck & R. Gilmour (Eds.), Personal relationships 4: Dissolving personal rela-
tionships. New York: Academic Press.
Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H. & Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer–seller relationships.
Elangovan, A. R. (2001). Causal ordering of stress, satisfaction and commitment,
and intention to quit: A structural equations analysis. Leadership and Organiza-
tion Development Journal, 22(4), 159–165.
Fram, E. H. & Callahan, A. (2001). Do you know what the customer you penal-
ized yesterday is doing today? A pilot analysis. Journal of Services Marketing,
15(6), 496–509.
Fullerton, G. (2005). The service quality–loyalty relationship in retail services: Does
commitment matter? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 12(2),
99–111.
Garbarino, E. & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust
and commitment in consumer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63, 70–87.
Goods, D. J. & Evans, K. R. (2001). Relationship unrest: A strategic perspective
for business-to-business marketers. European Journal of Marketing, 35(5/6),
549–565.
Gremler, D. D. & Brown, S. W. (1996). Service loyalty: Its nature, importance and
implications. In B. Edvardsson, S. W. Brown, R. Johnston & E. P. Scheuing
(Eds.), Advancing service quality: A global perspective (pp. 171–180). New
York: International Service Quality Association.
Gwinner, K., Gremier, D. & Bitner, M. J. (1998). Relational benefits in services
industries: The customer perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 26(2), 101–114.
Halinen, A., Havila, V. & Salmi, A. (1999). From dyadic change to changing net-
works: An analytical framework. Journal of Management Studies, 36(6), 779–794.
Hart, W. L., Heskett, J. L. & Sasser, W. E., Jr. (1990). The profitable art of service
recovery. Harvard Business Review, (July–August), 148–156.
Johnston, R. & Mehra, S. (2002). Best-practice complaint management. Academy
of Management Executive, 16, 145–154.
Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (1993). Structural equation modelling with the
SIMPLIS command language. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
Keaveney, S. M. (1995). Customer switching behaviour in services industries: An
exploratory study. Journal of Marketing, 59, 71–82.
Lee, M. & Cunningham, L. F. (2001). A cost/benefit approach to understand
service loyalty. Journal of Services Marketing, 15(2), 113–130.
Lee, J., Lee, J. & Feick, L. (2001). The impact of switching costs on the customer
satisfaction–loyalty link: Mobile phone service in France. Journal of Services
Marketing, 15(1), 35–48.
Levitt, T. (1983). After the sale is over. Harvard Business Review, (September–
October), 87–93.
Lovelock, C. (1994). Product plus. New York: McGraw-Hill.
McCollough, M. A., Berry, L. L. & Yadab, M. S. (2000). An empirical investiga-
tion of customer satisfaction after service failure and recovery. Journal of Service
Research, 3, 121–137.
Mattila, A. S. (2001). The effectiveness of service recovery in a multi-industry
setting. Journal of Services Marketing, 15(7), 583–596.
Maxham III, J. G. (2001). Service recovery’s influence on customer satisfaction,
positive word-of-mouth and purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research,
54, 11–24.
Maxham III, J. G. & Netemeyer, R. G. (2002). Modelling customer perceptions of
complaint handling over time: The effects of perceived justice on satisfaction and
intent. Journal of Retailing, 78(4), 239–252.
Mittal, B. & Lassar, W. M. (1998). Why do customers switch? The dynamics of
satisfaction versus loyalty. Journal of Services Marketing, 12(3), 177–194.
Mittilä, T., Järvinen, R. & Järvelinm A.-M. (2002). Cut-off process in reinsurance
relationships. Service Industries Journal, 22(3), 15–36.
Morgan, R. & Hunt, S. (1994). The commitment–trust theory of relationship mar-
keting. Journal of Marketing, 58, 20–38.
Mueller, L. O. (1996). Basic principles of structural equation modelling: An intro-
duction to LISREL and EQS. New York: Springers Textes in Statistics.
Oliva, T. A., Oliver, R. L. & MacMillan, I. C. (1992). A catastrophe model for
developing service satisfaction strategies. Journal of Marketing, 56, 83–95.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithalm, V. & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service
quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 41–50.
Ping, R. A. (1997). Voice in business-to-business relationships: Cost-of-exit and
demographic antecedents. Journal of Retailing, 75(2), 261–281.
Ping, R. A. (1999). Unexplored antecedents of exiting in marketing channels.
Journal of Retailing, 75(2), 218–241.
Price, L. L., Arnould, E. J. & Trerney, P. (1995). Going to extremes: Managing
services encounters and assessing provider performance. Journal of Marketing,
59, 83–97
Selnes, F. (1998). Antecedents and consequences of trust and satisfaction in buyer–
seller relationships. European Journal of Marketing, 32(3/4), 305–322.
Sharma, N. & Patterson, P. G. (1999). The impact of communication effectiveness
and service quality on relationship commitment in consumer professional service.
Journal of Service Marketing, 13(2), 151–170.
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J. & Sabol, B. (2002). Customer trust, value and loyalty.
Smith, A. K., Bolton, R. N. & Wagner, J. (1999). A model of customer satisfaction
with service encounters involving failure and recovery. Journal of Marketing
Research, 36, 356–372.
Stauss, B. & Seidel, W. (2004). Complaint management: The heart of CRM.
Mason, OH: Thomson.
Tax, S. S. Brown, S. W. & Chandra Shekaran, M. (1998). Customer evaluations of
service complaint experiences: Implications for relationship marketing. Journal
of Marketing, 62, 60–76.
Tranberg, H. & Hansen, F. (1986). Patterns of brand loyalty: Their determinants and
their role for leading brands. European Journal of Marketing, 20(3), 81–109.
Voorhees, C. M. & Brady, M. K. (2005). A service perspective on the drivers of
complaint intentions. Journal of Service Research, 8(2), 192–204.
Yoon, S.-J. & Kim, J.-H. (2000). An empirical validation of a loyalty model based on
expectation disconfirmation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(2), 120–136.
Young, L. & Denize, S. (1995). A concept of commitment: Alternative views of
relational continuity in business service relationships. Journal of Business and
Industrial Management, 10(5), 22–37.
Index
alternative set 187, 190–2 consumer behaviour 7–9, 11, 12, 197
American Marketing Association 3 contemporary destination management
Annals of Tourism Research 3–8, 10 18
arts tourism 234 content analysis 5
attitudinal loyalty 245–8, 250, 251 culinary heritage 100
Australian Government Regional cultural tourists 233, 235, 239, 241
Tourism Program 144, 146 culture: destinations 233; environment
available set 190, 191 234; heritage 120, 236; identity 234;
awareness set 184, 186, 187, 190, 191 motivations 234, 239; tourism 234–5
customers: comments cards 209;
backpackers 195–9, 201, 203, 204 experience 208; loyalty 30, 159,
backpacking: destination 198; 244–7; relationship marketing 91;
experience 197–9, 203; identity 197 retention 244; satisfaction 4, 157,
behavioural loyalty 245 159, 208–10, 214, 216, 222–4, 227,
behavioural risk 201, 203 230, 247; trust 247, 250, 251
booking trends 16
‘bottom up’ approach 20, 21, 122 decision making 4, 16, 158, 165, 183–5,
brands: awareness 184; choice 191; 188, 191, 209, 222; networks 102;
positioning 96 process 121, 157, 159, 187; system
25, 148; strategies 184
choice process 183 demand analysis 8
choice set 183–6, 188, 189, 191, 192; Department of Infrastructure and
types 186, 187 Natural Resources 147, 148
choice set (consideration) models 184 destination brand licensing 88, 90,
Cilento National Park 118, 119 92–7
cluster analysis 92 destination management organizations
co-branding 81, 100 15, 17, 19–25, 40, 89, 93, 96, 99,
cognitive distance 185 103, 108, 215
collaborative decision making 18 destinations: branding 29, 88–92, 95–7,
combined brand strategy 95 99, 100, 107, 108, 116; choice 183,
commercial positioning 52 190, 196, 197, 203, 222, 223;
competitive advantages 27, 32, 37, 40, competitiveness 115, 116;
41, 46 distinctiveness 16; image 89, 90, 157,
competitive disadvantages 27 230, 235; networks 117; positioning
competitive performance 50, 51 29
competitive position 208 Development of State and Regional
complaining behaviour 4 Development 147, 148
complaint management 244, 246, 247, direct effects 181
249–52 distribution channels 8, 181, 192
256 Index
dream set 187, 190 multidimensional development 114,
122
e-commerce (online commerce) 171,
174, 176, 177, 181, 182 national government organizations 115,
economic networks 140 117
ecotourism 114 national tourism organizations 90, 91,
environmental heritage 114 93
evoked set 184–8, 190–2 network analysis 127, 131–4, 139
excluded set 187, 190 network centre 120, 121
network constructs 79
family brand strategy 95 network economy 15
festival networks 75, 80 network elements 128
film-induced destination 70 network governance 120, 121
film-induced tourism 60, 61, 70 network models 127
film tourism 61, 70 network participation 74
financial risk 201–3 network system 133
network theories 138
geographic positioning 43 North-West Regional Development
grounded theory 77, 186 Agency 20
group package tour 207, 209–11, 213, Northern Rivers Regional Development
215, 216 Board 146, 148
Northern Rivers Tourism 146, 148
heritage tourism 234
hierarchy of effects 183 optimal networks 75
holiday decisions 158–60, 165 outdoor sports 103
overall satisfaction 208, 210, 214, 215
incidental tourists 241
indirect effect 176, 181 perceived risk 196, 197
individual brand strategy 95 policy networks 139
inept set 185 Porter’s competitive diamond 115
inert set 185 pricing 8
information: exchange 75; sharing 32–7 proactive strategies 246, 252
intermediate products 101 production networks 74
products: decisions 183; design 209;
Journal of Marketing 6, 101 development 209
pull motivations 222, 224, 225, 229,
knowledge exchange 31, 34, 37 236, 241
purchase behaviour 245
local environment plans 148–50 purchase intentions 209, 210, 215, 216
local networks 80 push motivations 222, 224, 225, 229,
local tourism organizations 43, 53, 99 236, 241
longitudinal observations 4, 5, 139
qualitative methods 9, 134, 195
market analysis 8 quantitative methods 9, 11, 63, 77,
market segmentation 209, 210, 216, 134, 197
229, 242
marketing: channels 203; environment reactive strategies 246
6–8, 11; functions 6–8, 11; research recovery behaviour 4
7, 8, 11, 210; strategy 8, 9 recovery strategies 246
mass risk 201–3 regional development agency 17, 18,
mass tourists 196, 197 20, 62
Matese National Park 118, 119 regional environment plans 148
motivation, types of 222, 235, 236 regional tourism organizations 93
motivational dimensions 233 regional tourist boards 18
Index 257
relationship dissolution 246, 251 territorial management 116
relationship marketing 4, 88, 244 territorial network 125
repeat business 209 territorial parks 118
resource acquisition 79 ‘top down’ approach 21, 23, 122
risk: dimensions 200–2; perceptions Torbay Development Agency 20
195–201; risk reduction strategies tourism: information centres 64;
195, 197–9, 202, 203; types of 196 journals 4, 7; networks 27–33, 36,
rural destinations 100 37, 120–2; segmentation 159, 160
tourism distribution system 181
sales promotion 8 Tourism South East 20, 23
service attributes 210, 212–15 tourist gaze 60, 103
service failure 246, 251 tourists: behaviour 235, 236;
service quality 207–10, 213, 214, 216 motivations 221–30, 233–5, 237,
SERVQUAL 207, 208 239; roles 196; typology 196, 223
ski corporations 40–3, 45, 47, 53 traditional commerce 171, 173
small- and medium-sized enterprises 41, travel behaviour 207, 210
91–3, 96 travel decisions 170
social network 74, 75, 127, 130, 131, travel risk 196, 197
134, 140 TV-induced tourism 61
social responsibility 12
South Warwickshire Tourism Company unavailable set 187, 190–2
20, 22–5 unawareness set 190, 191
Spanish Foreign Tourist Expenditure UNESCO world heritage list 119
Survey 172 urban tourism 233
Spanish Tourism Studies Institute 172
strategic positioning 41, 44–6, 50 vacation decisions 160, 164, 165
summer destinations 103, 190 value chain 100, 101, 117; model 101
supply chain 29 value constellation model 101
sustainable development 114, 122, 144 value creation 100, 101, 116, 117, 120
sustainable management strategies 27 Visit Brighton 20
sustainable tourism 114, 117–19, 120, Voss Extreme Sport Festival 102
122, 138 Voss Municipality Tourist Office 99
SWOT analysis 18
winter destinations 103
technological network 130, 131 Winter Olympic Games 103
territorial competitiveness 113–15, 120, world heritage city 239, 241
122 world heritage sites 233, 236
territorial development 114 World Tourism Organization 18
territorial governance 117, 118, 120,
122 yield management 30

Advances in Tourism Destination Marketing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advances in Tourism Destination Marketing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advances in Tourism Destination

Metin Kozak is Professor of Marketing in the School of Tourism and Hospitality

1 The Sociology of Tourism

2 Creating Island Resorts

5 Outdoor Recreation Management

7 Tourism and Sustainable Community Development

8 Tourism and Political Boundaries

9 Leisure and Tourism Landscapes

11 Tourism and Gastronomy

12 New Perspectives in Caribbean Tourism

13 The Advanced Econometrics of Tourism Demand

15 Sustainable Tourism Futures

16 Advances in Tourism Destination Marketing

Sustainable Tourism in Rural Europe

Edited by Metin Kozak, Juergen Gnoth

© 2010 Selection and editorial matter, Metin Kozak, Juergen Gnoth

ISBN 0-203-87412-9 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN10: 0-415-49238-6 (hbk)

1 Research in tourism marketing: an analysis of topics and

2 Diversity, devolution and disorder: the management of

3 Success factors of tourism networks 27

4 Strategic positioning and performance of tourism

5 A movie map conversion study: a case study of Pride &

6 Music-­tourism networks: a study of three festivals in

7 Destination brand licensing 88

8 Destinations as gadgets: co-­creating a sportive identity for

9 Networking approaches for sustainable destination

10 Tourism destinations: a network analysis of the web space 125

11 Exploring stakeholder roles in destination management

12 Influence of women’s lifestyles on holiday decisions 157

14 The formation of destination choice sets: an interpretive

15 Risk perceptions and risk reduction strategies as

16 Identification of important service factors in group

17 Holiday resort visitor motivations and their relationship

18 Building a tourist typology based on motivations for

19 Effect of complaint management on loyalty versus

1.1 Evolution and trends of tourism marketing papers within

1.1 Relative frequencies of tourism marketing papers published

Alejandro Alvarado Herrera is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the

The idea of contributing to the present volume originated during discus-

Marketing is a culture, an organizational function and a set of pro-

Marketing is a culture, an organizational function and a set of pro-

Metin Kozak, Juergen Gnoth and Luisa Andreu

Destination marketing and

TM ’s tourism marketing papers

Similarly to the scheme described above, to confirm these findings, we

Main topic/Specific topic Period

Marketing environment** 60.5 59.0 58.3 47.7 48.8 45.3 51.0

Destinations** 37.2 33.3 33.3 43.2 28.8 45.3 38.0

Quantitative technique used to analyze the data* 1995–2006 Trend/R2

Descriptive statistics 41.3% ↑ 0.772

Conclusions and implications

1 Each destination operates in a unique wider environmental and polit-

Conclusion and implications

Table 3.1 Benefits of networks to building profitable tourism destinations

Learning and Knowledge transfer

Source: Lynch et al. (2000) and original work of the authors.

Morrison et al. (2004) proposed the following working definition of

A set of formal, co-­operative relationships between appropriate organ-

Determining the success factors of networks

Table 3.2 Common activities and purpose

Collaborative product design and development 11 24 37 13 5

Information sharing 0.69

Conclusion and implications

6 Music-tourism networks: a study of three festivals in

8 Destinations as gadgets: co-creating a sportive identity for

Table 3.1 Benefits of networks to building profitable tourism destinations

A set of formal, co-operative relationships between appropriate organ-

Table 3.2 Common activities and purpose

First entries 0.11* 0.27* – 0.74 – 0.94 0.68*** 0.98 0.90

Table 5.1 Visitors’ expenditure impact during their visits to the destination

Table 5.2 Summary of incremental expenditure due to the influence of the movie

Co-branding/packaging of festival for consumption

Table 10.1 Main characteristics of Elba and Fiji networks

Table 11.1 Stakeholder groups represented in this study