Chapter 3- Review of Literature
Chapter-III
Review of Literature
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Destination Defined
3.3 Destination Planning
3.4 Destination Management
3.5 Destination Strategy
3.6 Destination Development
3.7 Emerging Scope and Areas of Destination Marketing
3.8 Conclusion
3.9 Reference
3.1 Introduction
T
he primary objective of literature review of previous and current aspects is to identify and understand the background of the research study. Review of literature is required for the basic purpose of cataloguing information and explaining as per the objectives of the research. it helps in entering into the deep of the knowledge and brighten the scope for research study with certain objectives. The existing body of knowledge helps to enlighten the problems at hand and giving the valuable insight on how best the study can be conducted with some of the constraints. The body of published literature serves as the theoretical and practical foundation for learning, understanding and developing a strong and deeper knowledge base. This literature review helps in the research design and the implications of findings.
Destination development and strategies for tourism in Sikkim is a holistic concept and as such the literature review is broadly divided into six categories, each one of which is separately describing and supporting the literature concerned.
3.2 Destination Defined
According to Pearce (1992), destination is a combination of products and services available in one location that drew visitors from beyond its spatial confines. By implication, it was essential to recognize the destination as an entity whose component parts are interdependent whereby a change in one brought about ramifications for all of the others. There were different studies that analyzed the elements that influenced the performance of the destination. Smith (1994, p. 175) defined a tourism region as ‘a contiguous area that was explicitly delineated by a researcher, planner or public agency as having relevance for some aspect of tourism planning, development or analysis’. So, a destination zone was considered one type of regionalization based on an inventory of qualitative characteristics. To define a destination zone was a matter of specifying the characteristics a region and then identified the areas that met those criteria (Smith, 1995).
Kaspar (1995) and moved forward and opined that the organizational structure or administrative framework of the destination should have similarities to the firm and the service providers of the destination or principals were viewed as profit centers managed within a company because they came under the helm of a local destination management organization ( LDMO). There was increasing competition between tourism destinations, and Smith (1995: 199) adapted the work of Gunn (1979) to develop a list of criteria to define tourist destination zones. These were a set of cultural, physical and social characteristics that created a sense of regional/ destination identity, adequate tourism infrastructure, a set of attractions and potential attractions, potentiality to support tourism planning agency and accessibility. Hu and Ritchie (1993) conceptualized the term destination as “a package of tourism facilities and services, which like any other consumer product, is composed of a number of multi-dimensional attributes”. Davidson and Mailtland (1997) outlined the characteristics of a tourist destination in the context of a single district, town, city or clearly defined and contained coastal, rural or mountain area as having a total tourist product based on a variety of resources, other economic activities either in conflict or complementary to tourism, a host community, public authorities responsible for planning the re- sources and a active private sector. Bieger (1998) claimed it to be the tourist product itself that in certain markets competes with other products. Buhalis et. el. (2000) defined the term destination as an amalgamation of tourism products offering an integrated experience to consumers. Leiper, et.al., (2000) studied the tourism destinations from the demand perspective and identifying it as a set of products, services, natural and artificial attractions able to draw tourists to a specific place, where the geographical location is simply one of the factors in tourism system. Some studies specifically examined categories within the supply system while other still highlight the critical role played by the actors that manage tourism destinations (Kerr, Barron, Wood, 2001). The realization here, led to studies which analyzed the subject of destination performance in terms of “the locality as a whole” (Lundtorp & Wanhill, 2001; Kozak, 2002), while other studies specifically examined categories within the supply system, such as small businesses in the case of Tinsley and Lynch (2001). Remaining other authors with a unified school of thoughts, still highlighted the critical roles and responsibilities played by the actors that managed tourism destinations (Kerr, Barron, & Wood, 2001). According to Franch and Martini ( 2002, p.5) destination management should be the strategic, organizational and operative decisions taken to manage the process of definition, promotion and commercialization of the tourism product [originating from within the destination], to generate manageable flows of incoming tourists that are balanced, sustainable and sufficient to meet the economic needs of the local actors involved in the destination. Howie (2003) proceeded by saying that destinations present complex challenges for management and development in that they served a broad range of the tourists’ needs and the tourism-related businesses as well as the local community, local businesses, and industries. Howie (2003) further proceeded with the view that destination management plays a key role in addressing the many and sometimes conflicting issues that arise in contemporary tourism and ensures its managerial implications with a different type of direction, control, planning and coordination. So the meaning of destination presented complex challenges for management and development in that those places essentially served a range of needs of tourists and tourism-related businesses as well as the resident community, local businesses and industries.
So, it was important to clarify and emphasize the important distinctions that existed between destination policy, planning and development (DPPD), destination management organization (DMO), and destination audit (DA). Although modern authors of tourism management sought to improve the competitiveness and sustainability of the destination, they differ fundamentally in that DPPD is essentially an intellectual process that uses information and judgment to make macro-level decisions regarding the kind of destination that stakeholders want. In the awareness that the potential competitiveness of a destination is influenced or limited by the relationships between these three forces, it is a trend to focus on the main “functions” that the last two forces – DMO and DA - play on the development of the destination. While the above definitions suggested the key word destination to be defined more broadly than one physical location, some definitions of destinations were artificially determined by political jurisdictions, which failed to take into consideration consumer preferences or tourism industry functions. A more holistic conceptualization of destination comprised all these various viewpoints in the definition of destination. Under this conceptualization, a destination coincided with the notion of a locality seen as a set of products/experiences/imagery, influenced in a critical way by the role of companies’ attitudes and their willingness to co-operate. By implication, scholars recognized that the destination was an entity whose component parts were interdependent whereby a change in one brought about ramifications for all of the others. Given those holistic definition, there was clearly a management issue in terms of planning and coordinating actions among the individual entities. Ansoff (1968) further stated that flexible strategic planning is essential to future development while others viewed it as an oxymoron. Strategic planning calls for greater flexibility and in future strategic planning and tactical planning should be bifurcated to an increasing extent to uphold the efficiencies of top management owing to the intensifying complexity and uncertainty confronting the organizations. In other words, strategy represents a vision for future tourism development, defines the target markets, business goals and development priorities. According to him, strategy also exhibited action plan considering time and funding constraints, training and marketing action plan considering time and funding constraints, training and marketing actions and changes in organization structure.
3.3 Destination Planning
3.3.1 Destination Planning
In their book “The Tourism System: An Introductory Text”, Mill R.C., & Morrison A.M. ( 1986) described that tourism planning process were designed to produce goals, strategies, and objectives for the destination area related to tourism development marketing, industry organization, and awareness, and to other support services and activities while tourism development plan normally provided overall guidelines for development, outlines broad development concepts, and identified individual development opportunities worthy of in-depth analysis ( through feasibility studies and/ or cost-benefit analyses). According to their opinion, while moving with tourism development the destination area would first find it necessary to establish overall development guidelines to ensure that when development occurred it complied with the area’s economic, environmental, social and cultural policies and goals. They also explained that the destination, going for development were needed to draft more specific guidelines describing the basic characteristics of development that it wishes to encourage. According to their interpretations of strategy and models for strategy formulation in tourism most of those were prescriptive and there was a need for further empirical research about patterns and processes that accompany tourism strategies other than planning (Mintzberg 1994).
3.3.2 Destination Policy
The Tourism Policy 1997 exhibited a belief that the potential of the tourism would be determined by the income levels of inhabitants and was basically a leisure industry not requiring the attention of the planners and administrators. According to this Policy, the belief was based on an information gap that systematically constrained the development of tourism in India over the years. National Action Plan for Tourism which was presented in the Parliament on 5th May 1992 proposed to achieve different types of tourism products, continual growth of tourism infrastructure, effective marketing and promotional efforts in the overseas markets and removal of all impediments of tourism. The Action Plan could not specify the infrastructural requirements and the investments needed to meet the targets and the sources of funding for the same. The Tourism Synergy Program consisting the activities and infrastructural components to be provided by the various agencies including the private sector and State Governments was thus prepared in 1993. It was further modified and converted into a ‘National Strategy for the Development of Tourism’ during 1996. These documents were evident for realizing the importance of tourism and ensuring a consensus on the developmental needs. It also contributed positively to all the infrastructural departments in a coordinated manner and ensured higher plan allocation and introduction of new innovative schemes for accelerated development and growth of tourism.
3.3.3 Destination Planning
In their article ‘‘Wildlife Tourism: A Strategic Destination Analysis’’ Higginbottom K. and Scott N. (2004), advocated the strategic planning and management of tourism that involves formulating, implementing and evaluating cross functional decisions and thereby enabling organizations to achieve their objectives. Considering his opinion, strategic planning and management of tourism was integrative across different parts of an organization/ destination and involved the development of a long term vision as to what was to be achieved by these integrated planning, operations and resulting decisions. Actually, developing a coordinated, integrated and synergistic approach was required in strategic planning for diverse perspectives, joint issues and sustainable orientation. They also proceeded with the view that destination strategic planning was not only logical as to support the philosophy of tourism development, but also necessary for destination planning in order to respond to increasing competition between tourism destinations around the world. They found that the types of tourism such as cultural tourism, major events tourism and nature-based or wildlife tourism were increasingly used by planners or developers to create or enhance the competitiveness of destinations.
3.4 Destination Management
3.4.1 Destination Management:
In their article, “Environmental Economics of the Khangchendzonga National Park in the Sikkim Himalaya, India”, Maharana, I, Rai S.C., Sharma, E.( 2000, September), explained the application and relevance of Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) to measure Willing to Pay (WTP) important part of Polluter Pays Principles (PPP). Using a random survey, the average WTP was 8.84 USD for foreign visitors per visit, followed by 6.20 USD per household per year and 1.91 USD per domestic visitor. The WTP was strongly influenced by age, education and income.
3.4.2 Destination Management
Simption, K. (2001) strongly recommended with some authors (e.g. Middleton & Hawkins, 1998) that development of tourism in harmony with the social, cultural, and physical environment of a destination can offer industry practitioners a substantial competitive advantage, as tourism industry attention to the maintenance of a pristine ecology and harmonious relations with the host community are clearly desirable from a purely self-serving point of view. Simption, K (2001) has also said that the concept of strategic planning is a cornerstone of conventional management theory, and has been discussed at length in the management literature .Described as ‘a comprehensive plan of action that sets a critical direction, and guides the allocation of resources to achieve long-term objectives. According to the author, strategic planning embodied with many advantages which are coincident with previously identified criteria for sustainability – it implies a long-term perspective, requires consideration of multiple situational influences, is clearly goal oriented, and can accommodate a wide range of conflicting perspectives.
3.4.3 Destination Management
The article ‘‘The Effectiveness of Environmental Interpretation at Resource Sensitive Tourism Destinations’’ was written by Kuo, I-L. (2002) mentioned that the development and implementation of tourism legislation with respect to the visitor activity could contribute to the ultimate destination experience. Environmental interpretation in a resource sensitive tourism destination was considered to be an effective visitor management strategy that helped to encourage visitors to adopt more appropriate behavior in order to sustain the development of tourism. Through this paper, he aimed to examine the processes and purposes of visitor management and environmental interpretation, including various definitions and functions. The effectiveness of environmental factors in visitor management with a sustainable orientation was also addressed in this paper.
3.4.4 Destination Management