Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management Perspectives

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tmp

Developing a destination management model: Case of Cappadocia T

⁎
Gamze Coban , Onur Sevket Yildiz
Nevsehir Haci Bektas Veli University, Faculty of Tourism, Nevsehir, Turkey

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Destination management organizations (DMOs) increase cooperation and coordination among stakeholders and
Destination management model contribute to the competitiveness of the destination. The purpose of this study is to develop a destination
Destination management organizations management model for Cappadocia that could make Cappadocia's tourism more sustainable and competitive. By
Destination management developing a procedure that could also be used for similar tourism destinations, it is also aimed to propose a
Destination marketing
study model. Interviews were conducted with stakeholders to identify the problems in Cappadocia's tourism and
Cappadocia
solutions for these problems were suggested. These interviews were content-analyzed. The main challenges are
related to infrastructure, superstructure, accessibility, human resources, facilities, sustainability and environ-
ment, and image. A well-established DMO could help the destination to become more competitive while also
improving sustainability and eliminating or minimizing current and potential problems. Cooperation and co-
ordination are highlighted as the most important functions due to the presence of several institutions related to
tourism management in Cappadocia.

1. Introduction
Tourism is an evolving industry that has become increasingly im-
portant in the global marketplace. Despite the challenges experienced,
tourism is still a growing industry. According to the World Tourism
Organization (WTO), international tourist arrivals have increased from
25 million in 1950 to 278 million in 1980, 674 million in 2000, and
1,235 billion in 2016 globally. Similarly, tourism income of destina-
tions worldwide has reached from US$ 2 billion in 1950 to US$ 104
billion in 1980, US$ 495 billion in 2000, and US$ 1,220 trillion in 2016.
Tourism, an important category of international trade in services (WTO,
2017), is also an important tool used for economic development of
countries.
When managed successfully, tourism can contribute to economy,
however, the benefits of tourism are not limited with the economic
impact. Tourism could also contribute to a healthier and richer social
life for the local people. However, there are also negative impacts of
tourism, such as environmental problems, social and physical carrying
capacity problems, inflation, and etc. Minimizing the negative impacts
and maximizing the benefits is possible through a successful destination
management. It is important to be aware that destination management
is an ongoing process. One of the challenges in destination management
is that it should be a set of coordinated efforts since there is not only
one institution which takes part in this process. In addition to the
governing organizations involved, the other stakeholders, e.g. local
people, tourism employees, NGOs, etc. should also be actively involved
in an ideal destination management process. As mentioned in
(Australian Regional Tourism Network's guide 2012), successful desti-
nation management could add value to the community both econom-
ically and socially. DMOs could be the key to manage a destination
effectively and efficiently. To be successful in destination management,
first, a management model should be developed. In this article, a des-
tination management model is proposed for Cappadocia which has
many natural, historical, and cultural assets. Cappadocia is a historical
area, located in Central Anatolia, largely in the Nevsehir, Kayseri,
Kırsehir, Aksaray, and Nigde Provinces in Turkey and in 1985, Goreme
National Park and other rock sites in the area were designated as UN-
ESCO World Heritage sites (Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 2018).
Managing tourism could be a complex process due to the various
factors affecting it. The complexity increases even more while mana-
ging a destination with both cultural and natural heritage. Although
natural and cultural heritage give strength to a destination, sustainable
and effective use of these assets becomes more challenging. Moreover,
the contradiction between the transforming nature of cultures and the
need for conservation of the heritage (at least for economic/tourism
purposes) makes tourism managers' task more difficult. While debating
about heritage and authenticity of a tourism destination, the most
convenient approach might be to consider tourist perceptions; i.e. how
tourists perceive heritage and authenticity or how heritage and au-
thenticity might affect tourists' perceptions. Similarly, (Bryce, Curran,

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gamzecoban_85@hotmail.com (G. Coban).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.02.012
Received 8 November 2018; Received in revised form 13 February 2019; Accepted 22 February 2019
2211-9736/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz
O'Gorman, and Taheri 2015) examined authenticity from heritage
consumers' point of view. Kolar and Zabkar (2010) discuss authentici-
ty's role in heritage marketing as a key factor between cultural moti-
vation and loyalty. Nuryanti (1996) points the postmodern tourist's
very individual interpretation of heritage while also emphasizing that
built heritage adds more challenges in terms of conservation and
planning. This is especially an issue for developing countries since the
conservation and rapid development are quite likely to contradict. (Lu,
Chi, and Liu 2015) make similar arguments on their research on Litchi
Bay, China while debating the challenges in heritage tourism destina-
tions. They also emphasize heritage's significance in terms of its lin-
kages with tourists' perception of authenticity, destination image, and
tourist satisfaction. (Ismagilova, Safiullin, and Gafurov 2015) discuss
historical and cultural heritage's linkage with destination image, too. As
an example of heritage sites, rapid tourism development in Goreme, a
major part of Cappadocia, has brought some changes in society and
environment which also made conservation more challenging (Tucker
& Emge, 2010). Another important point, stated by Tucker and Emge
(2010), is that Goreme is focused on Byzantine heritage and natural
rock formations. However, the region's diversity of natural and cultural
assets is not limited only with those which are currently popular in
tourism industry. Although it is clear that the currently used tourism
assets are quite significant, inclusion of contemporary culture is not at a
sufficient level comparatively. Tucker and Emge (2010) mention the
alienation of local community from Goreme, Cappadocia's tourism
management process which might be a result of both restrictions on
making modifications to natural or built heritage which the older
communities used to have the freedom to do (such as making and/or
modifying cave dwellings) and unclarity of their own culture's role in
tourism.
2. Literature review
Tourism is developing very fast and this results in changes in
tourism products and destinations. Therefore, there is growing interest
in new and different destinations. Product diversity is also required to
achieve success in tourism. Cappadocia, which hosted many civiliza-
tions throughout the history, has a rich, cultural, and artistic heritage.
Cappadocia is a very important tourism region due to its very special
geological structure, rock churches, underground cities, and fairy
chimneys and the region is also very important in Christian history.
Therefore, strategic plans need to be developed to ensure the sustain-
ability of the attractiveness of Cappadocia especially considering the
carrying capacity. When a destination is improved via the investment in
tourism and effective and sustainable use of the resources, it also
benefits the local community and even the country or region econom-
ically and socially. Similarly, Jamal and Getz (1995) claim that the
benefits of tourism development can be shared by different stake-
holders.
It is useful examine some of the definitions of destination in the
literature before examining the case of Cappadocia. “… a tourism
destination is a package of tourism facilities and services, which, like
any other consumer product or service, is composed of a number of
multidimensional attributes that together determine its attractiveness
to a particular individual in a given choice situation” (Hu & Ritchie,
1993: 26). According to Buhalis (2000, 97) “destinations are amalgams
of tourism products, offering an integrated experience to consumers”.
These integrated tourism products and services are consumed under the
brand name of the destination.
(WTO, 2007) defines ‘local’ destination as a physical space with
both physical and administrative boundaries and also includes the
mixture of services, products, and attractions to this definition. Ac-
cording to (WTO, 2007), the destination appeal and experiences are
shaped by attractions, amenities, accessibility, human resources, image,
and price. Although there are different approaches to the concept of
destination and its management, it can be argued that similar factors
118
Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128
are considered in managing a destination. Different actors in destina-
tion management are expected to have different viewpoints (Beritelli,
Bieger, and Laesser, 2014). This does not only affect the way of defining
a destination but also reflects the fact that there are many stakeholders
to be considered while managing a destination due to the significance
of their roles, overall impact of their actions, and the impact of actors'
actions on each other's interest.
The following definitions of destination management take stake-
holders into account for their importance and also indicate its com-
plexity due to the necessity of many coordinated efforts. “Destination
Management is a process of leading, influencing and coordinating the
management of all the aspects of a destination that contribute to a
visitor's experience, taking account of the needs of visitors, local re-
sidents, businesses and the environment” (VisitEngland's report, 2012:
3). “Destination management: an ongoing process in which tourism,
industry, government and community leaders plan for the future and
manage a destination” (Australian Regional Tourism Network, 2012:
5). “Destination management is a strategy and way for strong regions
that have the courage for concentrations of forces for common devel-
opment, common organisation and active sales of its key competitive
advantages” (Maráková & Medveďová, 2016: 4). Destinations are cre-
ated by a set of products and resources which include many stake-
holders. Thus, the coordination of these stakeholders' efforts is of great
importance (Maráková & Medveďová, 2016). Maráková and
Medveďová (2016) also emphasize the importance of destination and
its complexity which might be because of the complexity of the re-
lationships between stakeholders. Interdependence of multiple stake-
holders are also highlighted by Jamal and Getz (1995) due to the
complexity it leads in destination management. Buhalis (2000) in-
dicates the challenge that the variety of stakeholders and their con-
flicting interests bring into managing and marketing a destination.
Although a detailed discussion on stakeholders is beyond the scope
of this study, it is useful to highlight the main assumption about who
are considered as stakeholders in this paper. There are many actors
which may have a direct or indirect role in managing a destination and
a destinations' management could have an impact on many people and
organizations. Sternberg (1999) mentions three main usage of the
concept of stakeholder. The first one is an interest- and motivation-
based approach. The second one deals with the complexity of factors to
be considered while trying to achieve a specific outcome. The third one
emphasizes that organizations must be accountable towards their sta-
keholders. The common point is that there are people and organizations
who have an interest in and are affected by the outcomes of destination
management. Freeman's (1984, 25) definition of stakeholder, namely
“any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achieve-
ment of the firm's objectives” (cited by Welch & Jackson, 2007: 183), is
still useful for determining a destination's stakeholders. However, ra-
ther than final outcomes (achievement of objectives), all processes and
actions in the destination are expected to have an impact on stake-
holders. Downgrading these impacts to interests could result in a lim-
ited view of stakeholder concept especially for destination manage-
ment. Pouloudi (1999) indicates the challenge of analyzing
stakeholders since a stakeholder could be a group or an individual.
Destinations usually include businesses, administrative bodies, local
people, and visitors. Even a single business in a destination has many
stakeholders such as shareholders, employees, and etc. Due to different
and sometimes conflicting interests, thus expectations, of public sector,
private sector, and civil society (Žibert, Koščak, and Prevolšek, 2017), a
destination is even more complicated than a single business unit. That
does not mean a stakeholder analysis of a business is simpler, however,
Cappadocia destination includes many organizations, local people from
different cultural backgrounds, and different administrative bodies. In
this study, local people, tourism businesses, tourism related NGOs and
governmental organizations are considered as primary stakeholders to
deal with destination management. Although the visitors are also sta-
keholders in essence, they experience their visit in a very limited time
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz
and their activities in the region are limited by the supply side.
Therefore, they are not considered as primary stakeholders in destina-
tion management. Though not directly, local people are included in this
study via local business people, local employees, and other residents
such as those who work in the region for administrative bodies or
through NGOs. This preference was made in order to avoid perception
bias, at least to some extent, especially considering those who are not
aware of the technical details of tourism industry.
It is well known that there are some social impacts of tourism. These
include both positive and negative impacts. On the other hand, some
impacts (e.g. cultural change) could be regarded as positive or negative
depending on the point of view. Moreover, host community's support is
crucial in destination management because tourism development has
impacts on local residents as argued by (Gursoy, Jurowski, and Uysal,
2002). These impacts could be associated with tourism or other factors
depending on the perceptions. For example, Monterrubio, Gullette,
Mendoza-Ontiveros, Fernandez, and Luque's (2012) study indicates that
crime rate was not perceived as related to tourism by the local residents
of Huatulco, Mexico. Very probably due to the significance of percep-
tions, many studies on social impacts of tourism have focused on host
community's perceptions (e.g. King, Pizam, and Milman, 1993; Tovar &
Lockwood, 2008; Monterrubio, Gullette, Mendoza-Ontiveros,
Fernández, & Luque, 2012). (Haley, Snaith, and Miller, 2005) suggest
that the host community's thoughts on destination management per-
formance and their attitudes should be integrated with strategic ob-
jectives and actions. To summarize, although it is required to determine
host community's perceptions of social impacts of tourism, these views
could only be helpful if they are integrated to destination management
and development plans.
Tosun (1998), based on the study conducted in Urgup, Cappadocia,
indicates that local factors such as host community and local authorities
should also be included while planning tourism development in de-
veloping countries although central planning is also helpful in some
ways. In a comparative study which includes two other destinations in
different countries, Tosun (2002) argues that local people's relatively
negative perceptions of tourism in Urgup, Cappadocia might be because
of the uneven distribution of tourism benefits among them. However,
the majority of respondents in that study were not linked with tourism
industry. In a study in Cradle Coast region, Tasmania, Australia (Tovar
& Lockwood, 2008), residents who were involved in tourism industry
reported more positive perceptions on the social impacts of tourism.
This might be an indication that economic benefits might have an im-
pact on the perceptions of other tourism impacts. Tourism is a major
income source for Cappadocia region, thus it also stimulates other
sectors. Therefore, there is a need for a destination management model
both for transforming local people's perceptions of tourism and im-
proving their quality of life. This way, they could be both included in
the management process and develop more positive attitudes towards
tourism which will, in turn, have an impact on tourism development
and sustainability. Minimizing the conflicts between tourists and the
local people and enabling tourism to be realized in a safer manner are
important elements in protecting all natural and cultural tourism assets.
In Tourism Development Document (2015), it is stated that tourism
is an interaction among the stakeholders and it has an impact on en-
vironment it takes place. Thus, tourism cannot be separated from where
it takes place, i.e. destination. Although tourism cannot be limited with
the destination since there are other factors such as sending region,
different cultures, etc., destination is the key because the main ex-
perience occurs in the destination. For an effective destination man-
agement, it is important to plan the process with stakeholders, evaluate
the current situation, continuously monitor the progress, and make
changes if necessary. (VisitEngland's report 2012) emphasizes similar
points in destination management process. Pike and Page (2014) focus
on marketing role of a DMO even while defining it. They also call for a
rethink and focus on how marketing principles can be applied at des-
tination level. Thus, marketing of a destination should also be included
119
Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128
among a DMO's tasks. DMOs have a role of destination marketing that
develops destination brand, image and identity for attracting visitors to
the area. As expectations and demand for high quality increase and
competition among destinations gets fiercer, managing destinations in a
more coordinated way has become more vital. Jamal and Getz (1995)
refer to the lack of coordination and cooperation in tourism industry
while mentioning its highly fragmented structure. They also emphasize
the difficulty of coordination among different public and private or-
ganizations and among different enterprises. Due to its complexity,
tourism necessitates the development of strategies by both central and
local governments.
Increasing competition between destinations necessitates better
management not only for immediate success but also for sustainability.
Destination management is important in competing against other des-
tinations but success is possible through cooperation and coordination
among stakeholders. To achieve this, a DMO is needed. According to
the World Tourism Organization (2004), DMOs are the organizations
responsible for the management and/or marketing of destinations.
According to Pearce (1992), DMOs, which play a central role in mar-
keting a destination, are created to promote tourism and to take general
responsibility for attracting visitors to the destination (cited by Elbe,
Hallén and Axelsson, 2009). DMOs should coordinate the efforts of
stakeholders and analyze the threats and opportunities for stakeholders
(Elbe, Hallén and Axelsson, 2009). Morrison (2013) states that DMOs'
roles are leadership and coordination, planning and research, product
development, marketing and promotion, partnership and team
building, and community relations. These activities include but not
limited to development of tourism plans and policies, long and short-
term marketing plans, preferences of image and identity, and team
building and coordination. DMOs' role of coordination is also high-
lighted by (WTO, 2007). The importance of this role is linked with
multiplicity of stakeholders. (Beritelli, Bieger, and Laesser 2014) sug-
gest a dynamic approach in destination management and state that
DMOs should adapt their organizational structure continuously.
While natural resources give a destination comparative advantage,
the effective use of these resources makes the destination more com-
petitive (Crouch & Ritchie, 1999). It is only a comparative advantage
that the region possesses natural resources which are difficult or im-
possible to imitate. While choosing a destination, visitors consider its
attractions (natural, historical) and available activities. Without any
differentiation, a destination, even of a high quality one, cannot be
successful enough in a competitive market. Destination branding can
help in this sense by creating a unique identity for the destination, thus
differentiating it from the rest. A destination brand can be a name,
symbol, logo or graphic that allows the destination to differentiate itself
and be remembered easily. Choosing a destination is a complex process
that is affected by many factors. Destination brand and image are two of
these factors that affect destination selection. Image is a concept that
helps tourists understand destination choices (Baloglu and McClary,
1999).
“A Destination Brand is a name, symbol, logo, word mark or other
graphic that both identifies and differentiates the destination; fur-
thermore, it conveys the promise of a memorable travel experience
that is uniquely associated with the destination; it also serves to
consolidate and reinforce the recollection of pleasurable memories
of the destination experience” (Ritchie & Ritchie, 1998: 17).
As stated in Byron Shire Tourism Management Plan (Lawrence &
Buultjens, 2008), destination brand and image could be used for des-
tination marketing purposes such as promoting the destination and
attracting visitors. In the case of Cappadocia, first, the destination
brand should be clarified and the image of the destination should be
managed to support the purposes of destination management. The un-
ique natural and historical/cultural attractions which give Cappadocia
a competitive advantage must be emphasized. This advantage could be
used for clarifying destination brand. Although the image might be
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz
defined by many other factors which are not in control of destination
managing organizations, it could be managed and, in some cases,
modified in order to support the brand.
DMOs should give priority to destination marketing due to its im-
portance and thorough and professional marketing is a must (Morrison,
2013). Although management and marketing are sometimes considered
as two different concepts, in the case of destination management,
management includes every action and planning that will enable the
destination to reach the goals in a sustainable way and marketing is no
exception. This does not make marketing and management the same
but they are both included in an integrative destination management
approach. A similar approach is evident in (VisitEngland's report 2012)
for similar if not the same reasons. According to Buhalis (2000), des-
tination management and marketing should work to fulfill the needs
and desires of stakeholders. Although it is not an easy task to achieve, a
common solution can be found using several methods such as stake-
holder analysis, SWOT analysis, brainstorming, and etc. to satisfy all
stakeholders.
Every destination is different and the complexity of destinations
makes the range of these differences greater. Since the conditions and
structures of DMOs vary greatly, they should not be compared with
each other (Beritelli, Bieger and Laesser, 2014). The focus should be on
creating an effective DMO for the relevant destination. For Cappadocia,
the most important destination management component is the desti-
nation management plan which guides the process of implementation.
“A Destination Management Plan (DMP) is a shared statement of intent
to manage a destination over a stated period of time, articulating the
roles of the different stakeholders and identifying clear actions that they
will take and the apportionment of resources” (VisitEngland's report,
2012). Since many stakeholders have roles and could benefit from the
resources in such an ideal plan, it becomes more challenging than a
plan which includes only some governing institutions. In addition,
Tucker and Emge (2010) indicate the lack of clarity and even contra-
diction between different governing bodies in Cappadocia. Despite all
these challenges, a well-established and effective DMO could produce
better results especially in long term.
3. Methodology
In this study, semi-structured interviews were preferred in order to
receive in-depth information from the participants. During the inter-
views, stakeholders were given extra explanations about the question
when necessary. Order of same questions were changed in some in-
terviews depending on the response of the interviewees in order to
ensure integrity of the interviews. Every interview was noted down by
the permission of participants. Interviews were conducted during
March of 2018 and one interview lasted 45 min on average. The main
question, from which the other questions were derived, is “What are the
current issues/challenges in the region in your opinion?”. Every ques-
tion which includes issues/challenges was followed by asking the re-
spondents their suggestions for the issues/challenges stated. Based on
the main question, the following questions were derived.
1. What are the issues/challenges related to the regional airport/air
transportation?
2. What are the issues/challenges related to the road transportation?
3. How can tourism institutions in the region cooperate?
4. What are the issues/challenges related to tourism promotion?
5. What can be done in order to increase tourism income?
6. What can be done in order to increase length of stay?
7. What can be done in order to enable local people take more share
from tourism income?
8. What sort of precautions can be taken in order to preserve the re-
gion's authenticity and nature while developing tourism?
9. What sort of strategies and goals should be in focus for tour sales?
120
Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128
Interviews were made with the representatives of 2 non-govern-
mental organizations, 7 hotels, 5 travel agencies, and 1 governmental
organization. The total number of people interviewed is 18. These in-
terviews were analyzed using content analysis. Silverman (2001) states
that sufficiently precise categories could ensure reliability in content
analysis. Kassarjian (1977), on the other hand, indicates the sig-
nificance of categories for validity. Moreover, Guba and Lincoln (1989)
focus on trustworthiness rather than validity and reliability in quali-
tative research (cited by Houser, 2013). Although the criteria might
differ for trustworthiness, it is possible to argue that it also includes
validity and reliability as credibility and dependability (see the trust-
worthiness characteristics in Houser, 2013). Based on the content
analysis (Kassarjian, 1977), the responses and suggestions were dis-
tributed into five categories. These categories are as follows.
1. Attractions
2. Infrastructure and accessibility
3. Facilities and services
4. Hospitableness and human resources
5. Image and other promotional issues
Eren, Coban, and Yildiz (2016) shed some light to the current issues
in Cappadocia with a focus on managers' views in the region. Although
the methodological approach and the sample differed, very probably
due to managers' experience and stakeholders' professional focus, the
survey questions (issues) were distributed into very similar categories
(factors). This is especially significant because it confirms that the is-
sues in the region were diagnosed accurately, thus the reliability of
content analysis is enhanced. On the other hand, the results differed
especially on the challenges in the region. This might also be an out-
come of methodological differences and could confirm the reason for
qualitative method preference. In other words, qualitative method
could have given a more realistic outlook and increased validity. An-
other recent study on the region, conducted by Taheri, Gannon,
Cordina, and Lochrie (2018), emphasizes the importance of host sin-
cerity in cultural heritage sites like Cappadocia. This also supports the
importance of hospitable qualities in the region. The fourth category,
i.e. “hospitableness and human resources” is in parallel with Taheri,
Gannon, Cordina, and Lochrie's (2018) focus which further indicates
accurate categorization. These categories are also in line with the fac-
tors that are considered to shape destination appeal and experiences
offered (WTO, 2007), namely attractions, accessibility, amenities,
human resources, and image. Buhalis (2000) suggests six As to analyze
a destination. These are attractions, accessibility, amenities, available
packages, activities, and ancillary services. These also support the ca-
tegories.
Random purposeful sampling was preferred in this study. Purposive
(or purposeful) sampling lets the researchers collect in-depth informa-
tion on the study subject in line with study purpose (Maxwell, 1996:
cited by Ozdemir, 2010). The interviewees were chosen because they
represent a professional business, a tourism institution, or a govern-
mental body. Due to their experience, professional vision, and knowl-
edge on the destination, they were thought to be the ideal people from
whom both information and recommendations on the issues could be
obtained. Maxwell (1996) states that the researchers could choose
participants (in this case interviewees) based on their features that fit
the study purposes in purposive sampling (cited by Ozdemir, 2010). As
described by Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2007), first, a list was created
and the interviewees were chosen from this list. If the key informants
are interviewed, five people is regarded as sufficient as a rule of thumb
(Nastasi, 2015). Kuzel (1992) mentions about the limited sample sizes
used in qualitative research stating the tendency is 6–8 subjects for
homogeneous samples and 12–20 for maximum variations or testing
disconfirmation. However, Kuzel (1992) also calls for a focus on in-
formation richness rather than sample size in a qualitative research. In
any case, a total number of 16 key informant interviewees should be
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz
considered sufficient for this study.
Due to methodological limitations in this study, i.e. purposive
sampling and qualitative research, the results could not be generalized
(Onwuegbuzie & Daniel, 2003). However, each case examined or any
data collected could contribute to the literature.
4. Case of Cappadocia
In this paper, a mature level destination's, i.e. Cappadocia's, chal-
lenges are studied. A case study approach is used to determine
Cappadocia's tourism related problems. First, it is essential to determine
current situation of tourism in the destination. Cappadocia has already
some tourism history and the industry has already gone through some
phases. In other words, the tourism in Cappadocia is in a mature level.
This level of maturity is critical because a tourism region could carry its
tourism to a higher level or face serious problems due to its tourism at
this level. Australian Regional Tourism Network's report (2012) sug-
gests that destination lifecycle, i.e. the tourism region's level of maturity
in terms of destination lifecycle, is one of the factors that should be
considered while making destination management decisions. Another
important factor is the relation and contribution of tourism to other
sectors and economy. Tourism is one of the major industries in Cap-
padocia. Goreme National Park and the Rock Sites of Cappadocia, i.e. a
major part of Cappadocia, is included in UNESCO World Heritage Site
list and the region is categorized as cultural/natural (The Tourism and
Travel Guide to Turkey, 2019; UNESCO, 2019). The combination of
natural and cultural heritage and their link to each other (e.g. under-
ground cities, fairy chimneys which had also been used as dwellings)
contribute even more to the uniqueness of the destination. In short, the
region has an important tourism industry and it is in a critical phase in
terms its lifecycle.
A SWOT analysis was conducted in order to determine the current
potential of Cappadocia region and the problems experienced in terms
of tourism and discussions were held with the stakeholders. Solutions
for the identified problems are suggested based on both the stake-
holders' views and tourism theory and practice (Table 1).
In content analysis, interviews have been considered as the units of
analyses in this study since they can be regarded as a context for
meaning unit (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). As a result of con-
densation, which is believed to preserve the core of the interviews while
shortening (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004), categories, sub-categories,
and codes were reached deriving from the main theme. As stated above,
when the theme is distributed into categories, it can be seen that these
categories are very similar to the factors determined in Eren, Coban,
and Yildiz's (2016) study and this could be regarded as an indication of
the accuracy of categorization as well as the reliability of the research.
Considering the fourth category (hospitableness and human resources)
emphasized by interviewees as well as a current strength for the region
and Taheri et al.'s (2018) findings, it could be stated that factors that
may increase local hospitableness could strengthen the region. Cate-
gories obtained through content analysis are shown in Table 2. Fig. 1
illustrates the interpreted interrelationships between these sub-cate-
gories, categories, and the theme.
5. Results
5.1. Challenges and suggestions
Infrastructure and superstructure problems are not easy to solve
because they are directly related to financial resources. Transportation
problems, such as insufficient number of direct flights, dependency on
road transportation, and limited mass transportation opportunities are
also pointed by the stakeholders. Insufficient number of qualified em-
ployees, current employees' lack of commitment to the region, and their
reluctance for continuous learning are the human resource challenges
in the region. Moreover, the opportunities offered to tourism graduates
121
Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128
are not enough to keep them in the region. The access of some mo-
torized vehicles into the natural valleys are also criticized by the sta-
keholders because of the noise and other pollution created by them.
However, the stakeholders suggest a solution for this without losing the
financial benefit. They suggest that some routes should be defined for
specific tours such as the ones that are done with ATVs. By limiting the
areas that can be accessed by motorized vehicles, not only the pollution
in the areas where motorized vehicles are not allowed will be decreased
but also the pollution in the defined routes will be limited due to easier
control.
Vandalism problems threaten the sustainability of natural heritage.
On the other hand, too many visits to specific places in the region can
also constitute great problems in terms of sustainability even though
there is no vandalism. Thus, carrying capacity of each asset should be
defined and the number or time of visits could be limited. It is also
linked to the current short length of stay and seasonality problems.
Expanding tourism season and length of stay might extend tourist's
activities throughout the year and each tourist could have more time to
visit the attractions in the region thus expand his/her activities to a
longer time. In addition to many challenges for the businesses due to
short length of stay, in some seasons, the demand exceeds the carrying
capacity and this undermines tourist experience. The region needs more
recreational facilities and events, such as sports and entertainment, to
overcome this challenge, which may lead to more even distribution of
tourism activities throughout the year. For example, lack of venues for
events, such as a congress center, makes the region unable to evaluate
this great potential. Gastronomy is another potential that the region
should evaluate in a more effective way. Although the region has a rich
cuisine, there is no inventory and this limits the use of this potential
because many types of dishes are forgotten in time. A good inventory
might help the local food-related businesses develop new and authentic
products that would make the region gastronomically more attractive.
If evaluated, this sort of potentials could help the region in many ways
such as overcoming seasonality, extending length of stay, increasing
income, diversification of tourism products, creating more jobs for
tourism graduates, and etc.
Although very reasonable for those who come from developed
countries, balloon trip prices are too high for some of the domestic
tourists. Although the businesses should maximize their profit, this
problem might be a threat to sustainability because domestic tourists
should benefit from the region as well as foreign visitors. Moreover,
these prices are also very high for many local people which further
threatens sustainability. Considering the negative perceptions of social
impact of tourism discussed in the literature review, local people's
perception might be affected in a positive way in case they could afford
balloon trips and/or any other recreational activity in region. Rather
than just witnessing the results of tourist's activities, they could also feel
the joy of participating in the same activities. Another issue emphasized
by the stakeholders is that some domestic tourists find museum en-
trance fees high. However, this might be different from the issue in
balloon prices and more culture related because museum entrance fees
in the region, as well as in the country, is quite reasonable, if not cheap,
especially when compared to the heritage.
Some changes in the tourism market, namely increasing demand
from different countries such as China, bring more challenges to the
region. For example, number of Chinese speaking tourist guides are not
sufficient to meet the demand. However, language learning takes time
and it is not an easy task to solve this issue in a very short period of
time. English speaking tour leaders who interact between the tour guide
and the group is the current solution but this is still a problem to be
solved when smaller tourist groups and individual travelers are con-
sidered. Moreover, local people are somehow accustomed to tourists
from Europe and Japan. Another different culture might complicate
their perceptions on the development of tourism and its impacts. On the
other hand, their adaptation and acceptance of guests from different
cultures could also be easier due to local hospitableness and tourism
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128

Table 1
SWOT analysis for Cappadocia.
Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats

Unique natural and geographical assets (especially Fairy chimneys) The negative impact of rare balloon New products and marketing Unemployment
accidents on overall tourism methods through new
technologies
Diversity of tourism Insufficient urban and regional planning Potential for many types of Destruction of tourism
alternative tourism assets
Balloon tourism Insufficient level of security especially for A natural film plateau Security image
individual travelers problems
Thermal resources and potential for health tourism Insufficient number of qualified employees Corruption of local
culture
Potential for event tourism Lack of destination branding
The presence of rock churches, culture and faith tourism Carrying capacity problem, destruction of
physical tourism assets, focus on only some
regions
An important destination for Christians Environmental problems
Potential for sports tourism (horseback riding, cycling – especially Unbalanced prices for similar/same
mountain biking and trail biking, trekking, skiing – close to products
Erciyes mountain ski center, etc.)
Officially a national park Competition based on prices rather than
differentiation
Classified in UNESCO cultural heritage list Too much focus on profitability
Airport Lack of social activities
Cave Hotels Geographical indications are not registered
Year-long tourism potential Insufficient level of stakeholders'
awareness of the value and significance of
the region
Underground cities Insufficient promotion
Vineyards and wine production Lack of an organization specifically for
destination management
Popularity in social media through photography Insufficient diversification of tourism
despite the potential
Rich local cuisine Insufficient infrastructure and
superstructure especially for elderly and
handicapped people
Diversity of accommodation facilities (Boutique Hotels, Cave Hotels, Lack of an effective tourism plan
Branches of International Hotel Chains, and etc.)
Pottery, traditional carpet weaving, and other handcrafts Insufficient number of direct flights and
capacity of the airport
Haci Bektas Veli Complex
Local hospitableness

history in the region.
Stakeholders think that the country's and the region's image could
be improved by more efforts on promotion. Outdoor sports competi-
tions might be a good opportunity to promote the region without a big
budget while also extending the season. Coordination between the
stakeholders are also pointed by the stakeholders themselves as a point
to be strengthened. In addition, destination branding, image, and
identity issues are also pointed. Cappadocia's unique landscape is a
great strength for the region not only because it makes the region at-
tractive but also it can be used as a tool to be easily remembered or
distinguished. However, structures that do not fit the region aestheti-
cally reflect the problem of urban and regional planning. Better plan-
ning and more effective coordination between tourism stakeholders and
city planners could solve this issue especially in the long term.
5.2. Destination management organization for the region and other
recommendations
Founding a DMO could help to solve all these issues. This DMO
should represent all stakeholders, thus the members should be chosen

Table 2
Theme, categories, and codes.
Theme Cappadocia's challenges as a tourism destination

Category Attractions Infrastructure and Facilities and Hospitableness and Human Resources Image and other
Accessibility Services promotional issues
Sub-category Natural and cultural heritage Transportation Tourist activities Employees Promotion
Tourism businesses Cleanliness Experiences Local people Public relations
Codes Hotel star Infrastructure Balloon tours Qualified employees International promotion
Sports activities Superstructure Film plateau Employees' lack of foreign language skills Promotion at national level
Unplanned urban and Transportation (Air and Festivals Insufficient number of tourism graduate
regional development road) ATV tours employees or their lack of commitment to the
Vendors Security region
Nature Cleanliness of the Non-licensed Tour Guides
Length of stay Environment Insufficient number of Chinese speaking tour
Museums guides
Prices Inexperienced tour guides
Art and culture

122
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128

Sub-category Category Main Theme

Natural and cultural

heritage
Attractions

Tourism businesses

Transportation
Infrastructure and
Accessibility
Cleanliness

Cappadocia’s
Tourist activities challenges as a tourism
Facilities and destination and
Services recommendations for
Experiences the destination

Employees
Hospitableness and
Human Resources

Natural and cultural

heritage

Promotion
Image and other
promotional issues

Public relations

Fig. 1. Theme and categories in content analysis.

from all stakeholders. There are already governmental and non-
governmental tourism organizations with some budget. The DMO
should be founded as a board of members in the beginning so that the
DMO's budget could be kept to a minimum level. Founding a new or-
ganization with more financial sacrifice is easy to suggest but un-
realistic. As stated above, lack of coordination and cooperation is a
current challenge. The members should be chosen from those stake-
holders identified in this paper, therefore they can also facilitate co-
ordination and cooperation. In addition, a member from a researching
institution such as a university could be included in the DMO to co-
ordinate research and related activities. When the DMO is to identify or
challenge an issue, the relevant member(s) should be given tasks. For
example, if the DMO is to collect data from visitors, the members from
local tourism offices and hotels could realize this task without an extra
budget. If the DMO decides to conduct a promotional campaign, each
member should be given relevant tasks which they can achieve through
their institution.
The DMO should practice the following functions in order to solve the
issues and make the tourism in the region better:
For Cappadocia, a consistent brand and image that emphasize the
uniqueness and diversity of the region should be created (name, logo,
graphic, etc.). In this sense, in the third tourism event held by the
Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2017), it was emphasized that co-
ordination and communication among stakeholders were necessary and
that the identity of the destination should be determined and branding
and image studies should be conducted. All these destination managing

123
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz
efforts should be made with the participation of all stakeholders. Within
this context, the importance of establishing a DMO, also for ensuring
cooperation and coordination among stakeholders, is better under-
stood.
Solving tourism-related problems in general terms is important for
destination management because tourists perceive their experience as a
whole and they perceive the destination as an integrated product. A
destination management plan should be prepared by creating a
common and strong vision for Cappadocia's future together with the
stakeholders. The importance of tourism for the region should be re-
cognized. Tourism is a major source of income for the region and
tourism should be emphasized so that the region can develop eco-
nomically and socially. Thanks to tourism investments made in the
region, the living standards of the local people can also be raised. It is
necessary to integrate Cappadocia tourism management plan into the
local government policy and keep the current development in mind.
The history of the region has not been fully investigated and this
constitutes some disadvantages in tourism. For example, the region
could benefit from gastronomy tourism if a thorough cuisine inventory
is kept. Moreover, this would also support other tourism types. Any
research on Cappadocia's natural or cultural heritage will contribute in
a similar way. Therefore, the history of the region needs to be thor-
oughly investigated. The DMO, through the research member, could
cooperate with universities and other research institutions for detailed
research on the region's history.
Local tourists and local people are already informed about the
wealth of the region, so all other stakeholders should also be informed
about tourism and how it can be done more professionally. It is es-
sential to provide continuous education and communication in order to
ensure that they understand the values of tourism and society.
Stakeholders' awareness of sustainable tourism should be increased.
Continuous information at all levels, informative meetings, and con-
sultation are indispensable tools for sustainability of the region.
Infrastructure and superstructure must be improved. Alternative
modes of transportation (such as bicycle paths) should be developed to
solve traffic problems. Also, horseback riding and cycling can be sup-
ported for recreational purposes as an alternative to motorized vehicles
such as ATVs. Parking facilities need to be improved. Improvement of
public toilets, picnic areas, facilities for young people and playgrounds
are required. These improvements could also benefit local people di-
rectly and have an impact on their perceptions of tourism impacts.
Tourism product range needs to be improved in order to enhance
visitor experience, extend tourism season, and increase average length
of stay, thus tourism income can be increased. Alternative tourism
types, such as adventure tourism, bicycle tourism, wine tourism, gas-
tronomy tourism, congress tourism, nature tourism, photography
tourism, etc. should be utilized for this. It is also necessary to promote
handcrafted local products in an effective manner. While tourists are
encouraged to buy these products, local people should be encouraged to
produce. This could create income and make local people better benefit
from tourism related activities. Stakeholders state that in addition to
developing the product range, the expansion of the area to be visited in
the destination by including more underground cities in tours could
extend length of stay. In other words, tour visits to underground cities
should not only be limited with popular Derinkuyu and Kaymaklı and
more underground cities should be used, which will also expand the
area to be visited in the region. In addition, stakeholders suggest closing
the valleys to motorized traffic. Thus, the damage to the valleys will be
reduced to a minimum level and average length of stay will be ex-
tended. As well as ski trips to Erciyes, day trips to Güzelyurt and Ihlara
can be arranged. Stakeholders state that they have prepared a plan to
revitalize tourism in winter season which is also a low season. The plan
includes ski tours to Erciyes Mountain and this can be done in co-
operation with the neighboring city Kayseri so that both cities, namely
Nevsehir and Kayseri, can benefit from tourism in the region. The DMO
could be used to realize this plan beginning with the promotional
124
Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128
activities.
A cooperative system that will perform guidance activities for
tourists in Cappadocia should be established. Stakeholders express that
they have developed a call center project specifically for Cappadocia. It
is stated that tourists will be given guidance services on tourism with
this system. However, this project alone may not be enough. For this
reason, tourism advisory departments should work more effectively,
leaflets and brochures for tourists should be printed and distributed.
These applications are especially important for the individual tourists to
learn about the region.
Event tourism should be developed and entertainment opportunities
should be increased in the region. Events and festivals could be used in
Cappadocia in order to overcome some current challenges such as short
length of stay and seasonality. As reported also in Byron Shire Tourism
Management Plan (Lawrence & Buultjens, 2008), events and festivals
play an important role in destination image, visitor experience, sea-
sonality, and length of stay. Based on the feedback from stakeholders, it
could be stated that the festivals and events should be held in the
current low season. However, this brings another challenge because the
content of these events should also be in line with the current and
historical culture and some of these are season-specific. For instance,
Cappadocia region is famous for its vineyards, thus with grape pro-
ducts. There are some local festival traditions directly linked to grape
harvest but grape harvest has to be done in a particular season and that
time of the year is already tourism's high season. On the other hand,
there are other agricultural products in the region and those products
which are harvested in tourism's low season give an opportunity for
potential festivals and events just like the local grape harvest festivals.
Apricot is also another local product and harvest season is more ap-
propriate for evaluating low season of tourism. Sports competitions
could be organized for this and the winners could be awarded with
relevant products, i.e. apricot products. Concerts, theater shows, and
local dance shows are already common in that sort of events locally.
These events could be organized for tourism purposes by considering
the tourism market and destination brand and image without losing the
authenticity and alienating the local people. In addition, stakeholders
state that they plan to host film festivals and balloon festivals. Thus,
tourism can be revitalized with these festivals in low season.
It is important to emphasize integrated promotion with technology
(such as virtual reality, 5D image) that will bring the diversity of the
region to the forefront. New technologies could be used in order to
develop new products and they also provide destination managers with
new ways of marketing and communication. Although those new
technologies may also change the way people consume “destination”
products (e.g. virtual visit to a destination rather than an actual visit),
their applications in communication (such as social media and inter-
active communication opportunities) are priceless tools for more cus-
tomized products and cost-effective advertising. Moreover, even those
new products that may replace conventional tourism products (virtual
visit – actual visit), could also provide some new opportunities. For
instance, virtual visits could be used as promotional activities.
A destination management approach that is sensitive to the en-
vironment should be developed. Sustainable tourism should be sup-
ported by reducing the environmental impacts of tourism. The carrying
capacity of the region must also be taken into consideration. However,
it is not an easy task to achieve while every business is trying to max-
imize the profit by selling as much as possible especially in peak sea-
sons. On the other hand, if the length of stay can be extended and low
season can be evaluated with more activities in the region then it will
be easier for the businesses to focus on sustainability rather than sales.
In other words, if tourism in Cappadocia is extended throughout the
year more evenly, then sales of the businesses will increase without
threatening sustainability. In addition, sustainability is not limited with
maintaining physical assets. Tourism should also create awareness in
the local community and attitudes towards tourism should be changed
in a positive direction. In order to achieve this, carrying capacity should
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128

be taken into consideration, environmental awareness should be cre-
ated, infrastructure-superstructure should be improved and it should be
emphasized that tourism has, in fact, created important developments
for the region. The activities that serve both tourists and local people
both in terms of affordability and content could improve local people's
attitudes towards tourism which could also increase sustainability.
In order to overcome sustainability and competitiveness problems of
a destination, all tourism stakeholders should participate in the deci-
sions about the destination. DMOs are considered as essential tools for
the management and marketing of destinations. As a result, it is pro-
posed to establish a DMO for the region first, then a destination man-
agement model should be developed. The model should be a local scale
sustainable destination management model which considers region-
specific circumstances.
While establishing a destination management model, it is necessary
to determine what resources the region possesses and how they should
be emphasized in order to advance ahead of the competition and if
necessary, DMOs should brainstorm with stakeholders to create pos-
sible solutions. In the brainstorming, it is vital to listen to every idea
with no judgment and build new ideas on each idea. The answers to the
questions such as “Do tourists leave the region happily?, Which ex-
periences does the region offer to tourists?, With what expectations do
tourists come to the region?, What do tourists prefer to eat in the area?,
How do they travel around the region? (especially the individual
tourists), How do tourists perceive factors such as cleanliness, hospi-
tality, safety?” could actually reflect the competitiveness and success of
the destination. When the answers to these questions are focused on,
the solutions to identified problems will ultimately bring success. In
Fig. 2, a destination development model for Cappadocia is illustrated
which considers region-specific circumstances.
A destination development model is needed in order to make a
destination successful, competitive, and sustainable. For a successful
destination management and in order to ensure cooperation and co-
ordination among stakeholders, the DMO's role is very important. As
shown in the model, marketing and promotional activities are included
among the tasks of the DMO in addition to ensuring cooperation and
coordination. In order to do this, it is first necessary to establish a
destination identity. The basic resources of the destination, destina-
tion's characteristics, and its competition skills should be determined.
Then, the establishment of a destination identity and destination brand
should be started. Finally, a destination image should be created.
Destination brand and destination image should complement each
other. Fig. 3 illustrates the process followed for destination develop-
ment analysis in this study.
6. Conclusion
Based on stakeholders' views and theory, it could be argued that
Cappadocia has many challenges in terms of infrastructure, super-
structure, accessibility, human resources, facilities, sustainability and
environment, and image. Thus, the primary purpose of this study was
reached by creating suggestions as a result of considering these views,
theory and practice, and the challenges. The local economy in
Cappadocia depends on agriculture and tourism. In other words,
Cappadocia's core economic activities are tourism and agriculture.
However, agriculture is declining, so tourism is the core competence at
the region. Today, tourism is recognized as an important contributor to
the destination's economic development. It can be defined as an eco-
nomic driver for the local economy. On the other hand, it is important
to support sustainable tourism so that it can continue to be beneficial to
the destination for generations. Tourism development in the region has
been rapid and unplanned and the existing infrastructure facilities of
the region have not been improved parallel to tourism development.
Cappadocia needs medium and long-term local plans and strategies
such as a tourism development plan, carrying capacity or strategic plan.
Thus, it is necessary to make urgent mid- and long-term planning stu-
dies and to determine the physical and socio-cultural carrying capacity
of the region. Sustainable practices that could reduce the negative en-
vironmental, economic and socio-cultural impacts of seasonal and mass
movements should be applied.

Destination Factors
(Attractions, infrastructure,
human resources, facilities and
services)

Destination Marketing
(Destination Identity, Managerial Issues
Destination Management
Destination Brand, (Planning, Coordination and
Organization
Destination Image, Cooperation, Strategy,
(Representing Stakeholders)
Target Markets, Product Problem-solving)
Development)

Competitive and Sustainable

Destination

Fig. 2. Destination development model for Cappadocia.

125
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128

SWOT Analysis

Interview with Review of SWOT

stakeholders Analysis

Identification of
Challenges

Possible solutions based on stakeholders’ views

and theory and practice

Destination Management Model General Recommendations

Fig. 3. Procedure for destination development analysis.

In Cappadocia, infrastructure and superstructure problems should
be solved according to the types of tourism, carrying capacity, and
needs of tourism. However, these improvements are all limited with
financial resources. A possible solution might be a step by step ap-
proach; i.e. one problem should be focused at each time. For example,
transportation problems could be focused and when there are sig-
nificant improvements on this, then another improvement could be
made. This approach could be beneficial because when an improvement
is made, then the region begins to benefit from this improvement also
financially (such as more income through a good transportation
system). This advantage could make the following steps easier.
Moreover, any solid improvement that may also change local people's
perceptions in a positive way could accelerate sustainable tourism de-
velopment.
Another challenge in the region is seasonality. In some tourism re-
gions where tourism activity depends on the season (such as ski regions
or sea, sun, sand tourism regions), seasonality might be, to some extent,
inevitable. However, Cappadocia's heritage and potential tourism ac-
tivities can make the region avoid seasonality and expand tourism ac-
tivities throughout the year. In order to expand the tourism season,
different tourism types should be developed. In low seasons, some ac-
tivities such as festivals and events should be organized. Giving more
authority to public and private institutions related to tourism in the
region could be beneficial for the development of tourism. The sug-
gested DMO could also lead to a more accurate and coordinated feed-
back to the central authorities, thus it could play a role in gaining more
empowerment.
Promotion strategies for the historical, cultural and natural beauties
of the region should be developed. An active promotional agency is
needed in the region and DMO could take this role. Moreover, an
important disadvantage of the current promotion is that the region does
not have a strong web portal. Websites' importance in destination
marketing was noted by Kim, Yuan, Goh, and Antun (2009) due to their
functions for consumers and suppliers. A good website for Cappadocia
could be a valuable specific information source for consumers and an
effective marketing and communication tool for the destination. In
addition, a magazine that promotes the region can be published and
brochures can be used more effectively. Currently, there is not any
destination brand or brand strategy that reflects Cappadocia's unique
assets. Brand value can be created for the destination, the destination
image can be improved/modified, a slogan and a logo can be created
with efforts on promotion. Different governmental and nongovern-
mental bodies have that sort of activities, however the DMO's efforts for
coordinating these activities could increase effectiveness while clar-
ifying the points to be emphasized by these institutions.
Shopping opportunities can be improved. Tourists, as well as local
people, need more varied activities. In addition to the current con-
ventional businesses, different types of cafés and bars can be founded
for tourists to enjoy. Innovational products which are linked to local
culture are useful for tourism industry and they could help local people
associate their own culture with tourism. A tourism industry which is
based only on history rather than the current culture might alienate
local people from the industry. Local people should benefit from
tourism and they should be able to participate in decisions about
tourism management. Local people and other stakeholders should be
informed about the values of the region and the importance of tourism
for the region. In conclusion, there is a need for a long and medium-
term destination management plan for the region and an effective
working DMO. The destination management model developed in this
study could be helpful for the region since it considers the

126
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz
characteristics of the region and region-specific circumstances.
Although generalization of the results in this study is limited, there
are some implications for destination management. First, it reflects the
complexity of a destination with a natural and cultural heritage.
Preservation and use of this heritage as a tourism asset is challenging
especially for a developing country. Second, it indicates to the im-
portance of DMOs. Conventional organizations which are in charge of
destination management issues are not quite effective in a complex
destination. The increasing competition among destinations necessi-
tates innovational methods and organizations for destination manage-
ment and marketing. DMOs could be a way of solution both as orga-
nizational structures and due to their functions. Having assets for
tourism is not sufficient without effective management. Third, it could
be argued that coordination and cooperation are more important tasks
in destination management especially those with natural and cultural
assets. As a destination's complexity increases, it might be expected that
need for a DMO increases. Future research could focus on this issue.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their
contribution.
References
Australian Regional Tourism Network (2012). The guide to best practice destination
management. https://www.austrade.gov.au/.../5499/DM_Guide.pdf.aspx, Accessed
date: 7 May 2018.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of
Tourism Research, 26(4), 868–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)
00030-4.
Beritelli, P., Bieger, T., & Laesser, C. (2014). The new frontiers of destination manage-
ment: Applying variable geometry as a function-based approach. Journal of Travel
Research, 53(4), 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513506298.
Bryce, D., Curran, R., O'Gorman, K., & Taheri, B. (2015). Visitors' engagement and au-
thenticity: Japanese heritage consumption. Tourism Management, 46, 571–581.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.08.012.
Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism
Management, 21(1), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(99)00095-3.
Crouch, G. I., & Ritchie, J. B. (1999). Tourism, competitiveness, and societal prosperity.
Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-
2963(97)00196-3.
Elbe, J., Hallén, L., & Axelsson, B. (2009). The destination-management organisation and
the integrative destination-marketing process. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 11(3), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.695.
Eren, D., Coban, G., & Yildiz, O. S. (2016). Evaluating destination performance with a
manager-oriented approach: Case of Nevsehir Cappadocia. International Journal of
Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(5), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.
6007/IJARBSS/v6-i5/2145.
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing re-
search: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse
Education Today, 24(2), 105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.
Gursoy, D., Jurowski, C., & Uysal, M. (2002). Resident attitudes: A structural modeling
approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 79–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0160-7383(01)00028-7.
Haley, A. J., Snaith, T., & Miller, G. (2005). The social impacts of tourism a case study of
Bath, UK. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3), 647–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
annals.2004.10.009.
Houser, J. (2013). Nursing research: Reading, using and creating evidence (3rd. ed.).
Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Hu, Y., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1993). Measuring destination attractiveness: A contextual
approach. Journal of Travel Research, 32(2), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/
004728759303200204.
Ismagilova, G., Safiullin, L., & Gafurov, I. (2015). Using historical heritage as a factor in
tourism development. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 188, 157–162. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.355.
Jamal, T. B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning.
Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(94)
00067-3.
Kassarjian, H. H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer
Research, 4(1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1086/208674.
Kim, Y. H., Yuan, J., Goh, B. K., & Antun, J. M. (2009). Web marketing in food tourism: A
content analysis of web sites in West Texas. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology,
7(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/15428050902788352.
King, B., Pizam, A., & Milman, A. (1993). Social impacts of tourism: Host perceptions.
Annals of Tourism Research, 20(4), 650–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(93)
90089-L.
Kolar, T., & Zabkar, V. (2010). A consumer-based model of authenticity: An oxymoron or
127
Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128
the foundation of cultural heritage marketing? Tourism Management, 31(5), 652–664.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.07.010.
Kuzel, A. J. (1992). Sampling in qualitative inquiry. In B. F. Crabtree, & W. L. Miller (Vol.
Eds.), Doing qualitative research. Research methods for primary care. Vol. 3. Doing
qualitative research. Research methods for primary care (pp. 31–44). CA: Sage.
Lawrence, M., & Buultjens, J. (2008). Byron Shire tourism management plan 2008 to 2018.
Australian Regional Tourism Research Centrehttps://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/Home,
Accessed date: 4 May 2018.
Lu, L., Chi, C. G., & Liu, Y. (2015). Authenticity, involvement, and image: Evaluating
tourist experiences at historic districts. Tourism Management, 50, 85–96. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.01.026.
Maráková, V., & Medveďová, M. (2016). Application of destination management at re-
gional and local level in Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Czech Hospitality & Tourism
Papers, 12(27), 3–18.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2017). Republic of Turkey. Third Tourism Event (2017)
http://turizmsurasi.kulturturizm.gov.tr/Eklenti/57384,
turizmdeorgutlenmedestinasyonyonetimikomisyonraporupdf.pdf?0, Accessed date: 4
May 2018.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2018). Republic of Turkey. Department of Promotion
(2018) http://www.tanitma.gov.tr/TR,22783/kapadokya.html, Accessed date:
March 2018.
Monterrubio, J. C., Gullette, G. S., Mendoza-Ontiveros, M. M., Fernández, M. J., & Luque,
A. C. (2012). Social impacts of tourism as perceived by state-planned tourism des-
tination residents: The case of Huatulco, Mexico. International Journal of Tourism
Anthropology, 2(1), 34–52.
Morrison, A. (2013). Destination management and destination marketing: The platform
for excellence in tourism destinations. Tourism Tribune, 28(1), 6–9.
Nastasi, B. (2015). Study notes: Qualitative research: Sampling & sample size con-
siderations. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:qN6-
7UD2NsgJ:https://my.laureate.net/Faculty/docs/Faculty%2520Documents/qualit_
res__smpl_size_consid.doc+vecd=1vehl=envect=clnkvegl=tr, Accessed date: 11
January 2019.
Nuryanti, W. (1996). Heritage and postmodern tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,
23(2), 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(95)00062-3.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2003). Typology of analytical and interpretational
errors in quantitative and qualitative educational research. Current Issues in Education,
6(2), 1–33.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). A call for qualitative power analyses. Quality &
Quantity, 41(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-005-1098-1.
Ozdemir, M. (2010). Nitel veri analizi: Sosyal bilimlerde yöntembilim sorunsalı üzerine
bir çalışma. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 323–343.
Pike, S., & Page, S. J. (2014). Destination marketing organizations and destination mar-
keting: A narrative analysis of the literature. Tourism Management, 41, 202–227.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.09.009.
Pouloudi, A. (1999, January). Aspects of the stakeholder concept and their implications
for information systems development. 32nd annual Hawaii international conference on
system sciences (pp. 1–17). . https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.1999.772776.
Ritchie, J. R. B., & Ritchie, J. R. R. (1998, September). The branding of tourism desti-
nations. Annual congress of International Association of Scientific Experts in tourism (pp.
1–31). .
Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for Analysing talk. Text and
interaction(2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publication.
Sternberg, E. (1999). The stakeholder concept: A mistaken doctrine. Foundation for
Business Responsibilities, 4, 6–57. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.263144.
Taheri, B., Gannon, M. J., Cordina, R., & Lochrie, S. (2018). Measuring host sincerity:
Scale development and validation. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 30(8), 2752–2772. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-08-2017-0535.
The Tourism and Travel Guide to Turkey (2019). https://www.goturkeytourism.com/
things-to-do/goreme-national-park-rock-sites-cappadocia-nevsehir-turkey.html,
Accessed date: 3 January 2019.
Tosun, C. (1998). Roots of unsustainable tourism development at the local level: The case
of Urgup in Turkey. Tourism Management, 19(6), 595–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0261-5177(98)00068-5.
Tosun, C. (2002). Host perceptions of impacts: A comparative tourism study. Annals of
Tourism Research, 29(1), 231–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(01)
00039-1.
Tourism Development Document (2015). Causeway Coast & Glens Tourism and
Destination Management Strategy 2015–2020. https://www.causewaycoastandglens.
gov.uk/uploads/general/Tourism_Development_Document.pdf, Accessed date: 7 May
2018.
Tovar, C., & Lockwood, M. (2008). Social impacts of tourism: An Australian regional case
study. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.
1002/jtr.667.
Tucker, H., & Emge, A. (2010). Managing a world heritage site: The case of Cappadocia.
Anatolia, 21(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2010.9687089.
United Nations Educational (2019). Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/357, Accessed date: 3 January 2019.
VisitEngland (2012). Principles for Developing Destination Management Plans. https://
www.visitengland.com/, Accessed date: 7 May 2018.
Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: A stakeholder
approach. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12(2), 177–198.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13563280710744847.
World Tourism Organization (2004). Survey of destination management organisations.
Madrid. Spain: World Tourism Organization.
World Tourism Organization (2007). A practical guide to tourism destination manage-
ment. Madrid. Spain: World Tourism Organization.
G. Coban and O.S. Yildiz Tourism Management Perspectives 30 (2019) 117–128

World Tourism Organization (2017). UNWTO Tourism Highlights. Madrid, Spain: World Dr. Onur Sevket Yildiz Nevsehir Haci Bektas Veli
Tourism Organization. University, Faculty of Tourism. Summary of Education PhD.
Žibert, M., Koščak, M., & Prevolšek, B. (2017). The importance of stakeholder involve- in Tourism Management (Degree awarded: Doctor of Social
ment in strategic development of destination management: The case of the Mirna Science) Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Institute of
Valley destination. Academica Turistica-Tourism and Innovation Journal, 10(1), 43–55. Social Sciences MSc. in Tourism Management Nevşehir
https://doi.org/10.26493/2335-4194.10.43-55. Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Institute of Social Sciences
MBA in Hospitality Management HTMi/Switzerland, the
School of International Hotel and Tourism Management.
Dr. Gamze Coban Nevsehir Haci Bektas Veli University,
Faculty of Tourism Summary of Education PhD. in Tourism
Management (Degree awarded: Doctor of Social Science)
Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Institute of Social
Sciences MSc. in Tourism Management Balıkesir University,
Institute of Social Sciences.

128