The Nature of the Tourism Industry - Case Study Example

Background THE NATURE OF THE TOURISM INDUSTRY Tourism is about having fun. However, tourism is more than that. For most developed and developing countries however, it is reliable and a strong source of foreign revenue. Tourism provides thousands of jobs and foreign direct investments in local tourism attractions. In addition to their economic impact, tourists can also influence the host country's cultural and social environment. The tourism industry has these effect on civil society: it can lead to social and political activism seeking to balance the positive and negative impacts of tourism; local residents and foreign tourists may be politically socialized through tourism and the influx of tourists can lend support to the political regime in the destination country, such that tourists may be dealt with a greater importance by the host government. Tourism offers avenues and resources for the authorities to politically socialize local residents and foreign tourists through a process of "branding" (Morgan et al. 2004). Such exercises reify particular identities for locals to imagine themselves and their identities (Ooi et al. 2004). Tourism becomes a vehicle for destinations to selectively market their crafts, their own philosophies, and their cultural identities. Routing and zoning provides a framework for reorganizing space. Tourism transforms the cultural and historical life of communities. State authorities may package and redefine customs and cultures, and reframe relationships between cultural groups in society through tourism (Wood 1984). The relationships between state and civil society are always open and responsive. THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC SECTOR INTERVENTION Tourist consumption of local politics is often implicit, rather than explicit. Tourists, despite their relatively short trips, are subjected to many of the same conditions as local inhabitants. Countries perceived as unstable and unsafe do not receive many tourists. Their governments are often portrayed as being out of control, corrupt, or incompetent. When countries draw tourists, it implies that the tourists trust the host environment and system enough to come. Thus, tourists indirectly give a vote of confidence to the political regimes in the places they choose to visit. Howie (2003) points out there is rarely a single owner or manager of a destination, hence, there is less chance of a coherent set of goals and objectives. Poon (1993) states that today's tourists are more experienced travellers and therefore demanding, more informed of his or her rights and less passive in the quest of things to do than the tourist of a previous generation. Tourism success requires the cooperation of various agencies. Public authorities, local government, land control authorities, cultural management agencies, civil groups, and others have to cooperate to develop the industry. How the various agencies and political institutions within a country organize themselves to promote, plan, and develop itself as a tourist destination affects the speed, scope, and effectiveness in realizing its tourism development plan (Pearce 1997). Each agency has its own interests and agendas. Official tourism promotion authorities must take on a leadership role in the industry, and harness cooperation amongst various agencies through coercion and persuasion (Ooi 2004) Leiper (1990) noted that a 'system' can be defined as a set of elements or parts that are connected to each other by at least one distinguishing principle. In this case, tourism is the distinguishing principle which connects the different components in the system around a common theme. Main body How historical perspective in UK change from 1969-2002. The Development of the British Tourism Act of 1969 Manufacturing was still Britain's main source of income when the 1969 Tourism Act was created. The development of tourism act was the first statutory legislation in the country specifically concerned with tourism. The primary reason for the introduction of the act was the rapid growth of tourism within the UK. If the maximum economic benefit was to be realized, a new framework to manage tourismmust be put into place. The act had three parts: 1) The provision of financial assistance for hotel development; 2) The organisation of public sector tourism; and, 3) A system of compulsory registration of tourist accommodation. In addition, the 1969 tourism act organised tourism in England. It created the British Tourist Authority which is authorized to market Britain to overseas markets and advising ministers on tourism in general. The English Tourist Board (ETB) tackled the development issues in England encompassing signage, conservation, and training, star rating and quality. The ETB (this became the English Tourism Council in 1999) led to the crafting of its own national structure. The regional tourist boards were organized and subsequently funded by the ETB. There were twelve ETBs but this number was reduced to 10 due to a lack of funding. Regional tourist boards covered large and diverse geographical areas and carried out great deal of work to do with minimal resources. In 1986, the select House Committee for trade and industry found out that there was no overall policy applied to tourism. There was no coordination and cohesion in the funding and activities in the sector. The committee called for one statutory board reporting to one minister for better coordination. In 1979, the government decided to privatize British Airways. Privatization took place in 1987. This move increased private capital inflow into British Airways propelling it into market leadership. It was Lord Young who crafted the Leisure and Pleasure and Jobs work which led to the creation of new businesses into the tourism industry. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had appointed Lord Young to head the Department of Employment. This strategy led to the creation of thousands of new jobs. The DCMS developed the yearly Tourism Industry Forums which met two or three times a year in the late 1990s, with the agenda firmly controlled by the government. The government also controlled and dictated the tourist board agenda. In 2003, the British government discontinued the Forum and it began investing heavily into tourism infrastructure. The British government began giving grants for the tourist boards from 1969 to 2005. The government developed attractive rural areas, heritage landscapes and heritage town centres. The DCMS coordinates and links with the European Union and the World Trade Organization to formalize policy, research, strategy and funding. The DCMS is funded by UK central Government. A local DMO carries out research, fund development, planning /policy, promotion/marketing coordination, training and employment, conservation and preservation and promoting access On 6 July 2005, the United Kingdom won the right to host the 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sports was the lead agency which spearheaded the campaign for the London 2012 Olympics. The London Olympic bid led to the creation of a committee known as the Nations and Regions Group (NRG), chaired by Charles Allen and supported by LOCOG which provides leadership and strategic direction in ensuring that the whole of the UK is engaged with and benefits from the Games. It was the DCMS which tapped the support of Prime Minister Tony Blair, the Mayor of London, the Queen of England and the Olympic stars and athletes to remain united and work for the London bid. The DCMS organized a multi-sectoral preparation for the Olympic bid. The DCMS became an effective and efficient DMO for the London bid. The Olympic Delivery Authority will build venues and infrastructure and the London 2012 Organising Committee will stage the Olympic Games. (DCMS website). The Mayor of London cited that the new Olympic funding package agreed with government will allow the Olympic Delivery Authority not only to deliver the facilities for the Games but also to transform the area. The Games will pave way for a new sustainable mixed-use city district to be enjoyed by new and existing local communities. About 9,000 new homes in the Olympic Park and 30,000 homes in the wider Lower Lea Valley will be established. There will be 50,000 new jobs created and world class sporting facilities will be finished for community us. Unemployment will be reduced by 70,000. There will be an increase in foreign investment and tourism in London. (London 2012 website). Hosting the 2012 Olympic Games The key dates leading up to London winning the bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. January 2003 A potential London bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games is debated in Parliament. 15 May 2003 Tessa Jowell, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, formally announces that the Government will support a London Olympic bid. 15 July 2003 By the submission deadline,nine cities have submitted bids to host the 2012 Games: Havana, Istanbul, Leipzig, London, Madrid, Moscow, New York, Paris and Rio de Janeiro. 15 January 2004 London submits its IOC questionnaire response, which outlines the proposed venues and other information. 18 May 2004 As a result of a scored technical evaluation, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) reduces the number of cities to five: London, Madrid, Moscow, New York and Paris. 15 November 2004 London delivers its 600-page Candidature File to the IOC in Switzerland, detailing every aspect of the London 2012 bid. 16-19 February 2005 The IOC Evaluation Commission completes a four-day trip to London to examine the city's plans for the 2012 Olympic Games.Highlights include visits to the proposed venues and a Buckingham Palace dinner hosted by The Queen. 6 June 2005 The IOC releases its evaluation reports for the five candidate cities. The IOC praises the "very high quality" of London's bid and highlights the strong political support for the bid, the legacy the Games would leave in London and the involvement of athletes in every aspect of the bid. 6 July 2005 The final vote takes place at the 117th IOC session in Singapore. The London bid team, including Tessa Jowell and Seb Coe, make their final presentation to the IOC. Moscow is the first city to be eliminated, followed by New York and Madrid.The final two cities left in contention are London and Paris. At 12:46 BST,IOC President Jacques Rogges opens the envelope and announces that London will host the 2012 Games. Let the celebrations begin! Source: DCMS website TOURISM DESTINATION AND THE IMPORTANCE OF DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Several studies have discussed the role of tourism destination. Hu and Ritchie (1993:26) conceptualized it as "a package of tourism facilities and services, which like any other consumer product, is composed of a number of multi-dimensional attributes". Buhalis, (2000) claims that destinations are amalgams of tourism products, offering an integrated experience to consumers. In addition, Pearce (1992), defined it as an amalgam of products and services available in one location that can draw visitors from beyond its spatial confines. Bieger (1998:7) specifies that "a destination can therefore be seen as the tourist product that in certain markets competes with other products". The Ritchie/Crouch model of destination competitiveness differentiates the destination infrastructure (water, sewer, roads, etc.) from the destination superstructure. These concepts are crucial to the concept of the destination. Martini (2001) presents a demand perspective substantially identify a destination as a set of products, services, natural and artificial attractions able to draw tourists to a specific place and thereby affirm that geographical position does not coincide with destination. Another perspective is that the geographic location is one of the factors that comprise a destination. Tamma (2002) defines destination as a supply system correlated with a specific area. Keller (2000) remembers that people often use region, district, area and locality as synonyms together with the adjective tourism to mean tourism destination. Destination management plays a key role in addressing the multiple and competing issues that arise in contemporary tourism. Destinations present complex challenges for management and development in that they must serve a range of needs of tourists and tourism-related businesses as well as the resident community, local businesses and industries (Howie, 2003). DMO - A DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION A destination management organization (DMO) is a prominent destination developer which acts as catalyst and facilitator for the realization of tourism developments. The DMOs have been seen as destination marketing organizations. Dore and Crouch (2003) recognized that marketing remains the principal purview of DMOs. Gartrell described DMOs in terms of the mandate and function, broadly defines their role as the selling of cities. More specifically, Gartrell indicates that, Bureaus are charged withthe task of developing an image that will position their cities in the marketplace as a viable destination for meetings and visitors. They further must coordinate those constituent elements, which are quite independently diverse yet need to be homogenized, in order to attain that desired single image (1988:8). Specifically, the World Tourism Organization(2004) defines DMOs as the organisations responsible for the management and/or marketing of destinations and generally falling into one of the following categories: a.) National Tourism Authorities or Organisations, responsible for management and marketing of tourism at a national level; b.) Regional, provincial or state DMOs, responsible for the management and/or marketing of tourism in a geographic region defined for that purpose, sometimes but not always an administrative or local government region such as a county, state or province; and c.) Local DMOs, responsible for the management and/or marketing of tourism based on a smaller geographic area or city/town. DMO organizational structures also vary. DMO funding may be derived from several sources but is generally reflective of the organizational structure as well as the context in which the DMO operates. Examples include government allocations of public funds, specific tourism taxes or levies such as hotel/room taxes, user fees, allocations from gambling and lotteries, membership fees paid by tourism organizations, sponsorship and advertising in destination promotional activities, commissions for bookings and sales, commercial/retail sales at visitor centres, and in-kind contributions to host travel writers and meeting planners. (Ritchie & Crouch, 2003). Las Vegas, perhaps the most well funded DMO in the world, is an excellent example of special funding circumstances where dramatic revenues are raised from hotel and gambling taxes. Kasper (1995) pointed out that for political and structural reasons, a DMO is concerned with promoting co-operation and the widest possible harmonisation of objectives within a destination. Dore and Crouch (2003) highlight the fact that destination marketing is being done as a destination promotion, which may take the form of advertising, direct marketing, sales promotion, personal selling and publicity, and public relations. Ritchie and Crouch (2003) agree that in terms of current practice, many DMOs might be more appropriately termed destination promotion organizations. Heath and Wall (1992) argue that DMOs have acknowledged how significant their non-marketing roles are in developing, enhancing and maintaining destination competitiveness Getz, Anderson and Sheehan (1998) found a number of roles that DMOs fulfill in terms of product development within a particular destination. Minguzzi and Presenza (2004) refer to the importance of DMOs in enhancing perceptions of destination image and service quality. WORKS CITED Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism Management, 21(1), 97 -116. Dore, L., & Crouch, G. I. (2003). Promoting destinations: An exploratory study of publicity programmes used by national tourism organisations. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9(2), 137- 151. Franch, M., & Martini, U. (2002). Destinations and destination management in the Alps: A proposal for a classification scheme in the light of some ongoing experiences. Paper presented at meeting "Territoires et marchs 2me colloque de recherche en tourisme de l'Association franaise des IUP Tourisme, Htellerie et Loisirs", Universit de Savoie, Site de Chambery (F), 12-14 settembre. Gartrell, R. B. (1988). Destination marketing for convention and visitor bureaus. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Howie, F. (2003). Managing the tourist destination. London: Continuum. Hu, Y., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1993). Measuring destination attractiveness: A contextual approach. Journal of Travel Research, 32(3), 25-34. IACVB. (2004). Recommended standard CVB performance reporting: A handbook for CVBs. Washington, DC: International Association of Convention & Visitor Bureaus. Kaspar, C. (1995). Management imtourismus. Eine Grundlage fr das Management von Tourismusnternehmungen und - organisationen. (2 vollstndig berarbeitete und ergnzte Auflage), vol. 13. Bern, Switzerland: Verlag Paul Haupt. Leiper, N. (1995). Tourismmanagement. Melbourne: RMIT. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4), 947-964. Martini, U. (2001). Da luoghi a destinazioni turistiche. Ipotesi di applicazione del destination management al turismo alpino. In M. Franch.Destination Management: alla ricerca di una soluzione possibile. Torino, Italy: Giappichelli. Ooi Can-Seng. "Dialogic Heritage: Time, Space and Visions of National Museum of Singapore". In Interconnected Worlds: Tourism in Southeast Asia, edited by Peggy Teo, T.C. Chang, and K.C. Ho. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2001a. --. "Tourist Historical Products: Packaged Pasts of Denmark and Singapore". Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 1, no. 2 (2001b): 113-32. --. "Contrasting Strategies--Tourism in Denmark and Singapore". Annals of Tourism Research 29, no. 3 (2002a): 689-706. --. Cultural Tourism and Tourism Cultures: The Business of Mediating Experiences in Copenhagen and Singapore. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press, 2002b. --. "Brand Singapore: The Hub of New Asia". In Destination Branding: Creating the Unique Destination Proposition, edited by N. Morgan, A. Pritchard, and R. Pride. London: Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, 2004a. Pearce, D. (1992). Tourist organizations. Harlow, Essex, England: Longman Group UK Ltd. Ritchie, J. R. B., & Crouch, G. I. (2003). The competitive destination: A sustainable tourism perspective. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing. Sheehan, L. R., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1997). Financial management tourism: A destination perspective. Tourism Economics, 3(2): 93-118. Sheehan, L. R., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2005). Destination stakeholders: Exploring identity and salience. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3), 711-734. Tamma, M. (2002). Destination Management: Gestire prodotti e sistemi locali d'offerta. In M. Franch, (Ed.),Destination Management governare il turismo tra locale e globale (pp. 11- 35). Torino, Italy: Giappichelli. World Tourism Organization. (2004). Survey of destination management organisations. Read More