Tourism And Tourism Attractions PDF

Topic 1. TOURISM AND TOURISM ATTRACTIONS Bibliography of the topic Darbellay, F. & Stock, M. (2012). Tourism as complex interdisciplinary research object. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 441-458. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.07.002 Kusen, E. (2010). A system of...

Topic 1. TOURISM AND TOURISM ATTRACTIONS Bibliography of the topic Darbellay, F. & Stock, M. (2012). Tourism as complex interdisciplinary research object. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 441-458. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.07.002 Kusen, E. (2010). A system of tourism attractions. Tourism Review, 58(4), 409-424. https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/95362 Lascu, D.N, Manrai, L.A, Manrai, A.K. & Gan, A. (2018). A cluster analysis of tourist attractions in Spain. Natural and cultural traits and implicationsm for global tourism. European Journal of Mangenment and Bussiness Economics, 27 (3), 218-230. http://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-08-2017-0008 Priskin, J. (2001). Assessment of natural resources for nature-based tourism: the case of the Central Coast Region of Western Australia. Tourism Management, 22, 637-648. http://course.sdu.edu.cn/G2S/eWebEditor/uploadfile/20130509154754002.pdf Williams, S. & Lew, A. (2014). Tourism geography. Critical understandings of place, space and experience. London: Routledge. 1.1. Tourism as a system: the attractions´role 1.2. Attractions in the framework of the tourist area 1.3. Tourism attractions: definition, classification and assessment 1.1. Tourism as a System: the attractions´role What is TOURISM? WOOCLAP QUESTION Travelling? Source: Kusen, 2010, p. 414 (2nd paragraph)  TOURISM is a kind of leisure activity. Specificity?  A complex activity and research object (Darbellay & Stock, 2012).  It is not an industry in the conventional sense, but a multi- dimensional phenomenon (Williams and Lew, 2014)  Many definitions (not always coincident): WTO definition (1995): Set of activities that people carry out during their travels and stays in different places than their usual environment, for a consecutive period of less than one year, for leisure, business and other purposes.  One of the most ancient and interesting definitions was provided by Hunzinker and Krap (1942): Set of relationships and phenomena that occur as a result of the movement and temporary stay of people out of their place of residence, provided that it is not motivated by lucrative reasons (extracted from Darbellay & Stock, 2012)  Some implications for Tourism concept?  Non habitual/quotidian activity. An specific and Darbellay & Stock, 2012, p.  It often involves geographical movement. complex 444 - Distance? (any geographical scale) activity (2nd and 3rd - Time? (overnight stays?) paragraphs)  It involves a set of elements, activities, relationships and phenomena.  According to Darbellay & Stock (2012) → Tourism´s complexity arises through different elements: 1. Heterogeneity of actors (often with different interests) 2. Multilocality and translocal relationships - Tourists’ flows create relationships between places and, thus, create new and complex spatial relationships. 3. Globalisation - The touristification → has enabled tourism to be a producer of globalisation. - The globalisation → fosters tourism. - A sort of contradiction → Tourism as a positive enabler of economic development but a frequent cause of acculturation. 4. Extreme diversity of practices (tourism typologies??- Topic 3) - It depends on every kind of place, intentionality/motivation and practice. 5. A recreational turn - New vision of Tourism → Elements of the ‘everyday’ are now all associated with touristic values. - Tourism is increasingly considered as a (new) way of connecting to the (post)modern world rather than escaping from it (Williams & Lew, 2014, p. 8).  Tourism can be understood as a SYSTEM. General System Theory (GST) (von Bertalanffy, 1968): A set of two or more interdependent and interacting elements, which form an organised whole, and whose output is greater than the output that the units could have if they were operating independently. GST → widely used to recognize and analyse complex processes/activities/sectors that form a functional whole. e.g. Human body, Economy, Tourism, etc.  Tourism as a system: why?  Many components (which ones?) (WOOCLAP QUESTION)→ Relationships → Dinamism.  Different dimensions: territorial, economic, social.  Diversity → Tourism takes on many different manifestations and practices (See following topics). Tourism as a system: can be considered/anaysed from different approaches/perspectives: The Tourism System: basic components and its dynamics (geographical perspective) Source: Leiper, 1979 (cited in Darbellay & Stock, 2012) The Tourism System: basic components and its dynamics (economic and marketing perspective) Source: Kusen, 2010 ur proposal → The Tourism System: basic components and its dynamism (more comprehensive perspective) Attracted by Their demand creates It creates They grab ORIGIN OPERATORS AREA TOURISTS They manage FLOWS DESTINATIONS (AREA) TOURISM ATRACTIONS = a key component in They set its character tourism areas/destination s They are located in TOURISM TOURISM ATTRACTIONS They (potentially) are turned into PRODUCTS They (potentially) have an impact on 1.2. Attractions in the framework of the tourist area Tourism attractions = a key factor For tourism: Without attracttion, tourism has no meaning. Attraction is based on specific components (→ tourist experiences). For tourist areas: Tourism is always linked to a specific geograhical area (→ framework for the activity) Attractions are located in this area(s) → Products → Supply.  A geographical area = the framework for any tourist activity. Tourist area (Destination?- See Topic 4) ↓ What is the role of tourism attractions in it? A diversity and complexity of components (tourist and non-tourist) A deep interaction between them. Attractions play a major role. The tourist area can be considered as a system itself.  Tourism System and Spatial Tourism System OPERATORS TOURIST FLOW S S ATTRACTIONS PRODUCTS AREA/ As it can be DESTINATIO seen, Physical N (→ Supply) Basic ATTRACTIONS environme infrastructu play a major nt re and role in the (territorial Local equipment factors and framework of attractions) community spatial tourism Tourism Economic equipmen areas/destinati structure Tourism t and ons (sectors and agents services activities) INFLUX and IMPACTS: Assessment from the Sustainability perspective  Tourism attractions → They can come from: Physical environment (natural or man-made) Socio-economical base (activities, culture, history, ways of life and customs, etc.) They can generate tourism → Products A new dynamism that involves different components: tourism agents, infrastructure/ equipments/services, management and planning, etc. 1.3. Tourism attractions: definition, classification and assessment Tourism atracttions → Despite to be a key factor for tourism, not enough attention has been paid to it (Kusen, 2010). Not many studies (theoretical and applied). Lacks in: Conceptualisation/understanding. Classification. Set and assessment (in a specific area). 1.3.1. Conceptualisation To make possible a proper understanding of the Tourism Attraction concept → three questions can be made and answered: A. What are tourism attractions? B. What is the difference between tourism attractions and tourism resources? C. What does it involve the adjective territorial applied to tourism attractions? A. What are tourism attractions? The reason why tourists visit a tourism area (Kusen, 2010). - Elements linked to a specific area. - Elements that are able to generate tourism. - They have an intrinsic value. ↓ - They have the potential for attracting (specific groups of visitors). - An (increasing) diversity of elements. Kusen, 2010 B. What is the difference between tourism attractions and tourism resources? - There is no general consensus about terminology. - There is more consensus about differentiating between real tourism attractions and potential tourism attractions: - Real tourism attractions → They generate tourism, so they provide general visitor accesibility (in different ways: physical access, signage, sightseeing, interpretation, printed information, etc.). - Only the real tourism attractions can be placed on the tourism market and promoted. - Potential tourism attractions → They don’t generate tourism, but they have the potential for it. - They are largely unknown, unevaluated and unprotected from destruction, damage and unintended use, remain out of serious interest in tourism theory and practice. ↑ This can partly be explained as a result of continuing negative attitude toward long-term development planning in tourism sector. - Tourism attractions and tourism resources? - There can be a sort of confusion. - Indistinct use of both terms could be correct. - Nevertheless some authors distinguish between them: ↓ - According to Kusen (2010), all tourism attractions are tourism resources, but all tourism resources are not tourism attractions. - Tourism resource → can become a synonym for potential tourism attractions. - Tourism attraction → is used when refering to real tourism attractions. C. What does it involve the adjective territorial applied to tourism attractions? - As it has been said before, all tourism attractions are linked to an specific area. An intrinsic value. - However, the type of linkage to the area varies. - It depends mainly on the relationship with the geographical environment → 2 basic situations: TERRITORIAL A. Attractions directly supported on the geographical environment. TOURISM - An unavoidable linkage. ATTRACTIONS - They have physical manifestations on land. Not-territorial B. Attractions not directly supported on the geographical environment. tourism attractions Not territorial tourism attractions Territorial tourism attractions 1.3.2. Classification As stated above, there is an increasing diversity of attractions. In spite of this: There are no many studies on this issue. There is no an universal classification. Some proposals.  Some proposals (→ different criteria). http://stravelandtourism.weebly.com/visitor-at tractions.html#:~:text=There%20are%204%2 0different%20types,attractions%2C%20event s%20and%20heritage%20attractions https://tourismteacher.com/types-of-tourist-attractions/#: ~:text=Generally%2C%20tourist%20attractions%20can% 20be,%2Dmade%2C%20sport%2C%20events  Non-territorial attractions https://www.goodfellowpublishers.com/free_files/Chapter%20 5-279a1222c29364d7f5724c65288fb723.pdf May be considered as Products themselves (tourist use of non- territorial attractions)  Main criteria for classification? Support on geographical environment → TERRITORIAL vs NON- TERRITORIAL. Origin → NATURAL vs CULTURAL (MAN-MADE or MANUFACTURED). There are also DUAL or MIXED attractions (e.g. mines, reservoirs, crop fields, etc.). See Importance (intrinsic value) → HERITAGE VALUE TOPI (DECLARATION/PROTECTION) vs NON-HERITAGE VALUE. C2 Tourist use → REAL vs POTENTIAL.  Assessment? (See next section) PRACTICAL WORK 1: Voluntary reading for students (→ review) (until +0,5): Lascu, D.N, Manrai, L.A, Manrai, A.K. & Gan, A. (2018). A cluster analysis of tourist attractions in Spain. Natural and cultural traits and implications for global tourism. European Journal of Mangenment and Natural attractions They generally spread over large areas (except in some cases) They may content specific cultural elements Black Forest (Baden-Württemberg, Germany) Mount Uluru (Central Australia) Grand Canyon (Arizona, USA) Cultural attractions They are generally confined to smaller areas, being usually In some cases, they specific elements are (except in some cases) specifically linked to natural conditions Acropolis (Athens, Greece) Ensanche District (Barcelona, Spain) Little Mermaid Statue (Copenhaguen)  A decisive human intervention over a natural basis, which is deeply modified Vineyards (Tuscany, Italy) Riotinto Opencast Mines (Huelva, Andalusia, Spain) Kaprun Reservoir (Austrian Alps)  More detailed classifications? Depending on the specific characteristics of the attractions. A wide range variety. MOTIVATIONS AND EXPECTATIONS (by users/visitors) ATTRACTIONS Selection Territorial attractions TOURISM EXPERIENCES (Products) TOURISM TYPOLOGIES See Kusen, 2010 TOPIC 3 1.3.3. Set and assesment All the tourism attractions are linked to an specific area (in a way or another). How the attractions of a given area can be identified, known and assessed (tourism potential)? Essential for planning the activity and its development. Need of an appropiate functional classification of available tourism attractions and a methodology for their knowledge and assessment (especially of potential attractions). There is no universal methodology either. ‘It is desirable that all the (…) tourism destinations are categorized according to their tourism potential (especially taking into consideration their potential tourism attractions). An underdeveloped tourism area that has significant potential tourism attractions can be considered as a potential tourism destination whose attraction base should be evaluated, protected and prepared for tourism’. Kusen, 2010, p. 412.  Knowledge and Assessment of (every) tourism attractions in a territory. ↓ Different proposals (not so many). Kusen’s (2010) proposal is based on the attractions’ classification set out above (16 basic types). First step → Each of these types can be divided into subtypes (→ to make possible the identification and registration of the territory’s attractions). Next step → Determining each attraction’s properties (by defining a number of key data). ↓ Description (knowledge) and assessment.  A comprehensive methodology. As it can be seen, the nature of the data and the source for its collection are different. ↓ The most important → The distinction between: a) Simple/descriptive features: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, b) Assessment features: 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Kusen, 2010  This system provides a comprehensive overview of tourism attractions (real and potential). ↓ It can work as a TOURISM ATTRACTIONS INVENTORY. ↓ That is why it can be applied for tourism development planning in specific areas. It can enable a strategic and creative management of tourism areas. More specifically, it can facilitate an optimal design of a destination’s tourism products Kusen, based on a complete  Other proposal → Priskin (2001) (specifically applied to natural attractions). Development of a specific technique to identify and asess the quantity and quality of (natural) attractions (on a regional scale). Mainly (but not only) for potential attractions (→ resources). The aim → to present the results to government authorities and to incorporate them into the planning process. Method or framework for assessment?- Two components: A. Identification and field checks. B. Resource assessment.  A. Identification and field checks. - Different steps. - Interviews (with government authorities and local people). - Field work (→ all potential resources sites should be visited). - Systematic collection of data in the field (by the use of a survey form). - The survey should be constructed in two parts: a) First section → To collect information about the built attributes of the natural resource site. b) Second section → To collect information about the resources recreation suitability.  B. Resource assessment. - This second component goes beyond the inventory and, therefore, allows a systematic resources assessment → How? ↓ - Compilation of a matrix → evaluation of four categories: B1) Attraction diversity. B2) Accessibility. Each of them comprising a set B3) Supporting infrastructure. of indicators B4) Level of environmental degradation. - The scoring of each indicator would enable resource classification and data integration in a GIS (Geographical Information System). - Results would be presented in a series of maps that would show the spatial distribution of resources together with the attributes of each one.  B1) Attraction diversity - Resources’ features value?- Defining categories concerning that is difficult because it will be always subjective. - Priskin (2001) suggests the use of indicators as broad and diverse as posible (considering the nature and specificity of resources). 10 indicators are specifically proposed for natural resources: 1. Floral diversity. 2. Scenic diversity. 3. Recreation opportunity. Each indicator 4. Adventure opportunity. would be assigned 5. Bay or inland water body. a value from 0 to 10, to reflect its 6. Rocky coastline/bluffs. importance 7. Sandy beach. 8. Good vistas. 9. Scientifically interesting unusual features. 10. Geologic feature. Sites with high final scores included areas with multiple attractions (while sites with with low scores indicates low levels of attraction).  B2) Accessibility - It relates to the ease with which resources/sites can be reached physically, as well as the ease with which the resource/site can be enjoyed as a tourism product. - Priskin (2011) suggests the use of two indicators (for natural resources): 1. Road type. 2. Vehicle class. - Each of these indicators would be assigned values ranging from 0 to 5.  B3) Supporting infrastructure - Which infrastructure?- Those facilities that can enhance visitors’ enjoyment and that are also important for manteinance of environmental quality. - Priskin (2001) suggests seven indicators (for natural resources): 1. Toilet facilities. 2. Picnic tables. 3. Seats/benches. 4. Barbecue. 5. Rubbish bins. 6. Access for disabled. 7. Shade/shelter. - All indicators (except shelter) would receive a score of either 0 or 1. - Due to its specificity and importance, shelter would be received a score from 0 to 4 (depending on its suitability).  B4) Level of environmental degradation - What does it refer to?- To the well being of an ecosystem or landscape (which contains the resource or corresponds to it) → Factors of disruption or degradation (by tourism or other activities)? - Priskin (2001) suggests 10 indicators (for natural resources): 1. Litter. 2. Weeds. 3. Disease. 4. Impact of fire. 5. Erosion. Each indicator would be assigned 6. Trampling of vegetation. a value from 0 to 7. Destruction of dunes. 10 8. Erosion of landforms. 9. Tracks. 10. Built structures. - Resource sites with low scores would indicate areas where the disturbance caused by humans was minimal. Sites with high overall scores would indicate areas that require rehabilitation and/or visitor management.  As Priskin herself admits → This methodology is subjective (like most assessment techniques). But a consistent application of it should enable the getting of interesting and applicable to planning results → in the four categories considered (Priskin, 2011, p. 643-645): Attraction → Classification of resources into low, medium and high diversity of attractors. Accessibility → Classification of resources into categories of poor, moderate and good accessibility. Suporting infrastructure → Classification of resources into categories of no facilities, poor facilities and basic facilities. Level of environmental degradation → Classification of resources into categories of low, low to moderate, moderate, moderate to high, high enviromental degradation. By knowing the condition and amount of a resource base, decision-makers are better placed in making decisions about resource capability, land use compatibility and impacts.  Another difficulty (that Priskin acknowledges) → a key feature: An inventory (like the above) fails in defining the importance/significance of sites/resources in a geographical sense. Tourism attractiveness? Tourist attraction capacity? Its determination is essential → Why? To ascertain the relative importance of resources in the area itself and also compared to those of other/surrounding areas.  Defining a method to determine resource’s significance = a difficult task. Subjective. Most existing methods come from economics (→ not considered apropiate for many potential resources). Priskin (2001) suggests classfying resources according to their level of importance by using four criteria: 1. Scarcity of the resource relative to the (specific) area. 2. Level of uniqueness on a broader scale (regional, national or international). 3. Degree of attraction diversity of the resource. 4. Distance to next similar feature if one exists at all. Each criterion would be assigned a (subjective) score from 0 to 10. The sites with the highest scores would be the most significant/important attractions. These criteria would let the systematic comparison of different sites/resources in the (specific) area. The method could be also applied elsewhere, in separate geographical areas.  Conclusions of the Priskin’s proposal (Priskin, 2011, 645-646) →  It is necessary for decision-makers (planners and managers) to know the quality and quantity of resources/attractions as well as their spatial distribution and how significant they are (→ decision priorities).  This type of methodology could be easily repeated elsewhere. Although the indicators chosen by Priskin were derived from features found in the study area, a new set could be chosen (depending on the specificity of the area and its resources).  Inventories are useful but they also have a finite life. They should be regularly updated to maintain a database of accurate information. PRACTICAL WORK 2: Assessment of a specific tourism attraction (until +1): - Using: 1) Kusen´s basic methodological proposal (page 37). An adaptation to make it more logical (see next page). 2) Together with the Priskin´s proposal to determine the attractions´ level of tourist importance (as a conclusion of the inventory) (page 48). - A real (not potential) resource. - Free choice by the students (→ any territorial framework). - Power point format.  Kusen´s methodological proposal adaptation → Issues to be considered: 1. Name. 2. Location. 3. Origin: natural/cultural/mixed. 4. Tangible/intangible. 5. Category of importance → Any protection or declaration? 6. Special features → Oustanding or distinctive elements. 7. Degree of usage. Degree of tourist attraction; tourist flow?; any data or estimation? 8. Seasonality. 9. Type of tourist (excursionist, residential). 10.Activities. 11.Tourist accesibility and infrastructure 12.Carrying capacity → Any problem about it; any negative impact? 13.Wider system of tourism attractions → Is the attraction part of it?