Urban Tourism in East End London - Research Paper Example

Urban tourism in East end London, a case of Spitalfield Market Table of Contents 1. Introduction 3 2. Urban Tourism – characteristics and role 3 3. Urban tourism in East end London - Spitalfield Market 4 3.1 Current role of Spitalfield Market as a destination of urban tourism 4 3.2 Needs for re-development of Spitalfield Market as an urban tourism destination – issues of sustainability 6 3.3. Challenges in developing the role of Spitalfield Market as an urban tourism destination 7 4. Empirical Research – Views of Visitors 8 4.1. Overview of research 8 4.2 Presentation and analysis of results 9 5. Conclusion 11 References Appendix 1. Introduction The development of tourism destinations worldwide has been resulted because of the increase of competition in the tourism and hospitality sector. The efforts made by governments and organizations of the private sector for the support of the tourism industry worldwide are characterized by the following trend: innovation is promoted while emphasis is given on sites and activities that are likely to result not just to economic but also to social benefits. Moreover, issues like sustainability have become an indispensable part of the policies developed in the particular sector. Current paper focuses on a particular sector of the tourism industry: the urban tourism. Reference is made to a well – known Spitalfield Market in East London. The potential role of this Market as an urban tourism destination is critically examined using existing literature but also an appropriately customized survey. The findings of the literature and the empirical research lead to common assumptions: Spitalfield Market has many elements that could justify its characterization as an urban tourism destination; however, it is clear that the specific Market does not fully meet the requirements of urban tourism destinations, a fact revealed through the survey but it can also identified by studying the Market’s structure and operational characteristics; initiatives should be developed so that the specific Market’s features are best aligned with the principles and the terms of urban tourism destinations. 2. Urban Tourism – characteristics and role In its most common form, urban tourism is a term used in order to describe ‘the tourism in cities’ (Pearce, 2001 in Selby 2004, 11); however, the above description can have many different aspects. The sites of cities, which can be chosen as urban tourism destinations are not standardized. In accordance with Law (1993) urban tourism is more related to entrepreneurial activities; this means that when having to choose among urban tourism destinations, the one which is related to specific business or industrial activity should be more aligned with the requirements of urban tourism destination (Law 1993 in Selby 2004, 11). In the form described above, urban tourism can be used in combination with other forms of tourism – especially the cultural tourism – so that the expected benefits for the local community to be increased (Wahab et al 1997, 215). On the other hand, Hall (2005) notes that the primary reason for the establishment of urban tourism has been the need for the achievement of specific economic benefits for cities worldwide (Hall 2005, 196); thus, when similar initiatives are undertaken, it is necessary that their economic benefits – referring to economic benefits for the communities involved - are taken into consideration. 3. Urban tourism in East end London – Spitalfield Market 3.1 Current role of Spitalfield Market as a destination of urban tourism In order to identify the potential role of SpitalField Market as a destination of urban tourism it would be necessary to refer primarily to the Market’s characteristics – structure and facilities. Moreover, it would be important to describe briefly the products available in the particular Market; the range and the types of these products could be used in order to prove the value of the Market for promoting products of specific qualities/ variety. In accordance with a recent report, the Spitalfield Market is considered one of Britain’s most historical Street Markets (Info Britain, 2011). In the particular country, Street Markets can be identified in many areas, offering the chance to the public to locate goods and products of low price. The specific Market was first established in 1638; then its license included only ‘flesh, fowl and roots’ (InfoBritain, 2011); through the years, the role of the Market was changed. Today, a high range of products is available in Spitalfield Market – known also as the Old Spitalfields Market (InfoBritain, 2011). Moreover, restaurants and shops have been established aiming to lead to the gradual transformation of the Market into a Shopping Centre. The number of the Market’s weekly visitors has been estimated to 25,000 (Visit Spitalfield, 2011), a rather high figure if taking into consideration the turbulences in the global economy due to the recession. In order to check whether Spitalfield Market meets the requirement of a destination for urban tourism, it would be necessary to examine whether the specific Market can meet the requirements of urban tourism – as these requirements have been analyzed in the previous section. Spitalfield Market is located in the heart of London – near the City (see Figure 1, Appendix); the transport facilities available are many – including busses and the Underground – Liverpool street station is quite near (see Figure 1, Appendix). In the graph presented in Figure 2 (Appendix) it is made clear that the Market is constituted from two separate zones, the first one – the Old Spitalfields Market is used by the traders where the second one, is used by entrepreneurs; the second zone of the Market is structured as follows: a series of shops and restaurants have been established around an open area where stalls of traders along with the tables of the nearby restaurants are located (see Figure 4, Appendix). The external view of Spitalfield Market does not reveal its internal structure or its role; in fact, the Market’s visitor needs to approach the Market in order to understand its role and structure (Figure 3, Appendix). It can be concluded that Spitalfield Market does not meet all the requirements in order to be characterized as an urban tourism destination – as such destinations have been described in the previous section. The particular Market would be appropriate re-developed taking into consideration the issues mentioned in section 3.2 below. 3.2 Needs for re-development of Spitalfield Market as an urban tourism destination – issues of sustainability Current measures developed in Spitalfield Market regarding the promotion of sustainability seem to be limited to the following initiative: the Market’s restaurants recycle the food waste – this is a policy that can support the generation of energy while benefits exist also from processing the food in order to produce fertilizer (Spitalfield, Official Guide, 2011). No other plans of sustainability seem to exist in the particular Market. It is concluded that the Market contributes to the promotion of sustainability but the level of its contribution is rather low. The following measures should be developed by the Market’s administrators in regard to the promotion of sustainability: a) establishment of systems that could ensure the use of solar energy for the energy needs of the Market, b) expansion of existing recycling scheme; in fact, recycling should be promoted across all restaurants and shops operating in the market; traders would be also asked to use the recycling – where possible – in order to eliminate the negative effects of the Market’s facilities for the environment. Since the re-development of the Market – as a unit – is not expected to be initiated in the near future, the reference to certain strategies of sustainability like the establishment of double glazes and the change of the material used for covering the external walls of the Market would be not of particular importance. From another point of view, the promotion of sustainability in urban tourism is not related only to specific environmental benefits, but it can also includes’ a wide range of economic and social benefits’ (Cooper, 2007, 209). This means that sustainability in the particular market would be promoted not just by introducing environmental friendly policies and practices but also by developing policies that would make the Market more attractive to the visitors and the public in general. 3.3. Challenges in developing the role of Spitalfield Market as an urban tourism destination As noted above, Spitalfield Market was initially used as a Street Market for selling specific products; today, it has become one of London’s most important Street Markets – offering to the public products of various types. It should be noted that Spitalfield Market is not a purely commercial place; it also promotes the preservation and the development of British culture – attracting people from many countries worldwide. On the other hand, the number of tourists that visit the particular market can be characterized as low – as also proved in the survey conducted for current paper – see the analysis in the next section. This fact indicates the following problems: a) the promotion of the Market through the Internet, the Media and the Press is not satisfactory; the lack of funds necessary for the development of such project is possibly one of the causes of the above problem. However, the lack of cooperation between the stakeholders should be also considered as having a key role in the lack of effective schemes for the promotion of Spitalfield Market, b) the local authorities do not adequately support the transformation of the Market; traditionally, the Market was used as a place for selling particular products; this practice is being continued today with no particular changes. The lack of intention for radical changes in the Market’s range of operations is possibly explained because of the above fact: since the activities that were traditionally developed in the above Market are, still, developed normally, then everything is ok. However, it is possible that the funds required for the transformation of the place are not available – this issue cannot be clearly identified since the local authorities have not made an announcement regarding their plans on Spitalfield Market. The existing reports on the particular Market present just the commercial characteristics and advantages of this Market, c) the local community also avoids developing initiatives for the Market’s transformation; again, this practice can be related to the continuation of the common Market’s activities; it is, possibly, considered that the changes on the Market’s structure and role is not an emergent issue. In accordance with the above, the major challenge regarding the development of the role of Spitalfield Market is related to the standardization of the Market’s role; despite the fact that important changes have been made regarding the range of goods/ services available – currently, a series of restaurants and shops operate in the Spitalfield Market – along with the traditional Traders market. The above trend reflects the intention for the change of the Market’s traditional role – as a Street Market; however, the radical transformation of the Market’s role - for instance the establishment of an area appropriate for the development of cultural events - would require additional initiatives which should, in any case, be supported by the state or, at least, by the local community. 4. Empirical Research – Views of Visitors 4.1. Overview of research The value and the performance of Spitalfield Market has been explored using empirical research; more specifically, the field research method has been chosen for the specific study. In this context, a survey has been conducted among the Market’s visitors. The survey was based on the questionnaire presented in the Appendix section. The questionnaire includes 12 questions, which focus on the following issues: a) the demographic characteristics of the participants (age, gender and so on), b) the common practices used for the promotion of the area – at the level that through these practices the visitors’ attraction to the area was achieved – are explained and c) the views of the visitors/ participants on the Market’s quality (structure/ facilities); it should be noted that the particular areas/ facilities of the Market are analytically listed in the questionnaire – and were evaluated by the visitors using a grade from ‘Excellent to poor’ (See Appendix, II Questionnaire). The findings of the above survey – as included in the questionnaire (Appendix) in a percentage form – are analytically presented and discussed below making their correlation with the existing literature – as presented in the previous sections. 4.2 Presentation and analysis of results A series of different reasons can explain the increased number of visitors of the Spitalfield Market. In accordance with the survey conducted for this paper, the major percentage of the Market’s visitors are not tourists – a percentage of 58% of the participants answered negative to the question whether they are tourists. This fact can lead to the following assumptions: a) the quality of the Market’s goods/ services is high; the fact that locals prefer the Market, in terms of the goods/ services available, can be considered as an indication of the quality of the Market’s goods/ services, b) the promotion of the market is not effective; tourists are not aware of the Market’s existence – even if it is quite near in the Liverpool station, a station visited daily by thousands of visitors/ passengers. Moreover, the City of London – a major entrepreneurial centre – is quite near; again, this fact should lead to the increased number of tourists/ entrepreneurs, an assumption which is not verified showing the weaknesses in regard to the Market’s promotion in the external market, i.e. outside Britain. On the other hand, most of the Market’s visitors are women; in accordance with the survey, a percentage of 54% of the participants/ visitors are women; it could be assumed that the products/ services available in the Market mostly addresses women; however, this assumption could be characterized as non valid taking into consideration the following facts: the percentage of women within the population is high; moreover, women are more likely to be engaged in home-related activities, such as the buying of food and goods for the family. In this context, the increased number of women/ visitors of the Market is considered as justified. Moreover, the average age of the visitors is less than 30 – 38% of the visitors are above thirty while a percentage of 34% is between 20 and 30. The fact that there is also a high percentage of visitors who are under 20 (28%) leads to the assumption that most of the Market’s visitor are between 20 and 30 – a fact that should be taken into consideration if plans for the re-development of the Market are to be developed. Another important finding of the survey conducted for this study is the fact that the majority of visitors in Spitalfield Market are locals – a 34% of the participants originated from London while a percentage of 25% originated from other cities across UK. About 41% of the visitors/ participants originated from another country – most of the visitors were French (26%). The above percentages can be possibly considered as aligned with the findings of the first answer of the survey in accordance to which the percentage of visitors/ tourists has been estimated to 42%. At the next level, the participants have stated their view in regard to the way in which they have been informed on the existence and the operational terms of Spitalfield Market; it has been revealed that most of the participants identified the specific Street Market through the Internet. This fact is of particular importance since the promotion of the firm needs to be re-organized; promotion schemes which were proved to be effective in the past are also likely to be used but under the terms that the methodologies employed for the promotion of the Market will be aligned with existing market trends and requirements but also with the technology available for such projects. Another indicator of the visitors’ satisfaction in regard to the Market’s facilities and structure is the fact that a high percentage of the participants stated their intention to recommend the specific market to their relatives (76%). As for the types of activities most preferred, these include shopping (46%) and food (28%). Moreover, when were asked to rate the quality of the Market’s facilities and structure, most of the visitors were positive, choosing the characterization of ‘good’. The rating of the Market’s facilities and elements/ features is presenting in the questionnaire – Appendix section. This rating would be valuable for setting the criteria on which the re-development of the Market would be based – in case that the transformation of the Market to an urban tourism destination was decided, in the context described above. 5. Conclusion The value of urban tourism within the global market cannot be denied; however, not all urban tourism destinations manage to respond to the requirements of their role. Spitalfield Market has been initially established in order to cover the needs of the local community for a Street Market; gradually the Market’s role was transformed – through the establishment of restaurants and shops. The Market’s transmission from a pure Street Market to a destination of urban tourism has not been completed. A series of structural and operational problems can be considered as having the major role in this delay; however, the lack of effective cooperation between the stakeholders – mainly the community and the State – for the area’s transformation, is clear. On the other hand, there are intentions for the update of the Market’s role but it seems that the relevant goal is not adequately supported. The gradual improvement of the area – in terms of structure and the activities developed – would lead to the successful completion of the relevant transition process. In any case, this is an effort the results of which are expected to be clearer identifiable in the long term. References Church, A., Coles, T. (2007) Tourism, power, and space. Routledge Cooper, C., Hall, C. (2007) Contemporary tourism: an international approach. Butterworth-Heinemann Flanagan, W. (1993) Contemporary urban sociology. CUP Archive Hall, C. (2005) Tourism: rethinking the social science of mobility. Pearson Education Pacione, M. (2005) Urban geography: a global perspective. Routledge Pearce, D., Butler, R. (2002) Contemporary issues in tourism development. Routledge Selby, M. (2004) Understanding urban tourism: image, culture and experience. I.B.Tauris Sharma, K. (2004) Tourism and Regional Development. Sarup & Sons Wahab, S., Pigram, J. (1997) Tourism, development and growth: the challenge of sustainability. Routledge Williams, S. (2009) Tourism geography: a new synthesis. Taylor & Francis Online Sources Info Britain, Street Markets, online, available from http://www.infobritain.co.uk/street_markets.htm LondonNet, Spitafields Market, online, available from http://www.londonnet.co.uk/ln/guide/about/shopping_spitalfields.html Spitafields Market, online, available from http://www.spitalfields.co.uk/ Visit Spitafields Market, online, available from http://www.visitspitalfields.com/osm.html Appendix I. Aspects of the Spitalfield Market Figure 1- Spitafields Market, location (source: http://www.spitalfields.co.uk/location.php) Figure 2- Spitafields Market, commercial zones/ properties (source: http://www.spitalfields.co.uk/estate_map.php) Figure 3- Spitafields Market, aspect (source: http://www.londontown.com/LondonInformation/Sights_and_Attractions/Spitalfields_Market/afab/) Figure 4- Spitafields Market, aspect (source: http://www.londontown.com/LondonInformation/Sights_and_Attractions/Spitalfields_Market/afab/) II. Visitor Survey - Questionnaire 1. Tourist?  Yes (42%)  No (58%) 2. Your gender.  Male (46%)  Female (54%) 3. Your age.  Under 20 (28%)  20-30 (34%)  Over 30 (38%) 4. Cities of origin.  London (34%)  Other cities in UK (25%)  Overseas, please state your country. Europe France (26%) USA (11%) Other (14%) 5. How did you find about Spitalfield Market ?  Internet (34%)  Friends (25%)  Advertisements (24%)  Newspapers/Magazines (17%)  If other, please specify 6. Have you ever visited here before?  Yes (63%)  No (37%) 7. What is your main purpose of visiting this area?  Business (25%)  Visit friends and relatives (28%)  Holiday/Shopping (42%)  If other, please specify (5%) 8. How would you describe your experience during the visit?  Very dissatisfied -  Dissatisfied  Neutral (12%)  Satisfied (32%)  Very satisfied (44%) 9. Would you visit Spitalfield market again in the future? r Yes (72%) r No (28%) 10. Would you recommend this place to your friends or relatives? r Yes (76%) r No (24%) 11. What was the most interesting thing in this market? r Art gallery (11%) r Shopping (46%) r People - r Restaurant/food (28%) r Atmosphere (15%) 12. How would you rate the following within the envisage area How would you rate the following within the envisage area Excellent Good Fair Poor (quite low) Cleanliness of the streets 5 51 34 Range of attractions 7 35 22 Range of shops 6 39 48 Range of places to eat and drink 14 48 32 Quality of accommodation 17 36 25 Quality of the service encountered 15 42 33 Quality of the shopping environment 18 44 32 Signage Display maps and information boards 8 28 38 Road signs 4 25 31 Pedestrian signs 11 31 White/brown tourism signs 13 37 36 Public toilets Availability 4 45 38 Cleanliness 8 27 42 13. Please use the following blank if you have any comments. Read More