Crisis destination management: the case of Ischia Island

13 MANAGERIAL APPROACHES TO SUSTAINABLE TOURISM AND DESTINATION DEVELOPMENT VALENTINA DELLA CORTE, GIOVANNA DEL GAUDIO AND ALESSANDRA IAVAZZI University Federico II, Naples The aim of the paper is to deeply understand the different strategic choices a destination management organization (DMO) can make with a managerial approach in order to ensure the development of the destination by systematizing local resources according to a long run vision. Once the “sustainable tourism” is identified, it is necessary to understand which are the main strategic initiatives, a DMO can put in place, taking into account the stakeholders directly or indirectly involved in tourism activities, according to a responsible tourism approach. In order to identify common procedures and successful policies, the paper uses a comparative case study analysis in order to describe several existent best practices with some possible generalizations.The findings of this research highlight strategic governance choices, as well as the role of public and private actors, in facilitating destinations sustainable development. 1. Introduction Sustainable tourism can have different possible declinations, according to its three traditional pillars (environmental, economic and social). The aim of the paper is to deeply understand the different strategic choices a destination management organization (DMO) can make with a managerial approach in 1/ order to ensure the development of the destination by systematizing local resources according to a long run vision. Once the “sustainable tourism” is identified, it is necessary to understand which are the main strategic initiatives, a DMO can put in place, taking into account the stakeholders directly or indirectly involved in tourism initiatives, according to a responsible tourism approach. These initiatives regard not only the identification of resources but also the definition of the necessary skills and competences, in a systemic approach that allows activating development mechanisms (Della Corte, Sciarelli, 2012; Trevis, 2011). For this reason, a part of the paper refers to the analysis of some cities for which strategic choices and several specific governance policies stated them as mustsee destinations, critically analyzing the existing sustainability models using some proxies that allow identifying both the destination position and its strategic policies in sustainability. 2. Theoretical Overview on Sustainable Tourism Development Tourism is a phenomenon encompassing sociocultural and economic dimensions and affecting on various aspects. The aim of the paper is to deeply understand the different strategic choices a destination management organization (DMO) can make in a managerial approach in order to ensure the development of the destination by systematizing local resources according to a long run vision. Once the “sustainable tourism” is identified, it is necessary to understand which are the main strategic initiatives, a DMO can put in place. These initiatives regard not only the identification of resources but also the definition of the necessary skills and competences, in a systemic approach that allows to activate development mechanisms. For this reason, a part of the paper refers to the analysis of some cities for which strategic choices and several specific governance policies stated them as must-see destinations, critically analyzing the existing sustainability models using some proxies that allow identifying both the destination position and its strategic policies in sustainability. The research tries to answer the following questions: 14 1) 2) 3) According to a sustainable destination development, what are the main strategic initiatives a DMO can put in place? Which are the strategic assets, not only in terms of resources but also of skills and competencies in a systemic approach, that allows us to activate development mechanisms? Which are the strategic choices and governance policies that state a city as must-see destination according to the sustainability approach? For this reason, a complex theoretical framework is identified (Figure 1). Figure 1: The theoretical framework SUSTAINABLE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE-BASED THEORY SUSTAINABLE TOURISM LOCAL RESOURCES SUSTAINABILITY MODELS FIRM RESOURCES STAKEHOLDERS NETWORK CAPABILITIES SUSTAINABLE DESTINATION MANAGEMENT - Studies on sustainable tourism deepen their roots on the comprehension that it is necessary to deal with the potential economic, environmental and socio-cultural impacts of tourism activities on a destination (Jafari and Shanthikumar, 1989). The link between sustainable development and tourism comes out from the Brundtland Report of the WCED, which defines sustainable tourism, with particular reference to tourism activities, as “forms of tourism which meet the needs of tourists, the tourism industry, and host communities today without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. In this sense, it is necessary to adopt different sustainable tourism perspectives in order to deeply understand the complexity of this phenomenon. During the years, many scholars have analyzed the phenomenon and provided their contributions, but most of these definitions have been similar to the one provided by WTTC, for at least two main reasons, according to the main features of the phenomenon: 1. the WTTC gives importance to the “time dimension”, referring to the qualitative and quantitative conservation of the existing resources for an unlimited period; 2. they assume an overlapping perspective between the three pillars of sustainability, overtaking the environment and promoting an equilibrium (and often, an overlapping) among economic, social and environmental sustainability. The first contributions on the theme are focused on the environmental feature of sustainable tourism in ecological terms (WCED, 1987; Wight, 1993). Some scholars, in fact, link sustainable tourism to ecotourism, stressing the importance of the ecological component. This view implies an inadequate consideration of the management dimension and of the necessity of mechanisms for feedback (Choi and Sirakaya, 2006; Ko, 2005; Douglas, 2006). Since further contributions on the theme have emphasized the importance of evaluation models and indicators, there is no single tool that allows addressing all environmental, social and economic issues at all levels (Schianetz et al., 2007). Other studies instead stress the importance on stakeholders and, in some cases, on the visitor as one of the key factors facilitating sustainable tourism because of the experience he/she lives. - During the years, the concept of economic sustainable tourism springs out as the investments in the tourism sector necessary to ensure sustainable development (Richards, 1996). Further contributions highlight the importance of a long-term perspective, not only for resources’ preservation but also because the effects of current decisions can affect future situations in a long-run vision. According to this statement, the contribution of McElroy and Albuquerque (2002) seems to be the most useful since it underlines that “sustainability ideally seeks to preserve a permanent and widely shared stream of income by creating an adaptive competitive destination niche market through the ongoing guidance of participatory community planning without unacceptably sacrificing the socio-cultural and natural integrity of the asset base”. This contribution highlights the link between sustainable tourism and the development of a destination according to a networking perspective in which communities are included. Comparing the different definitions, it is possible to underline that most of the scholars have dealt with the sustainable tourism agreeing with the assumption of WCED, whether the one which have reworked the definition have stressed the attention on both the relationship between tourists and residents and the importance of preserving and respecting the local community from tourism processes (Swarbrooke, 1999; Lim and Cooper, 2009). During the years among the different contributions on sustainable tourism, the focus changes, referring not only at the ecological dimension of sustainability but also at the different stakeholders with which a destination interacts. In this way, scholars put in place new definitions of sustainability in which stakeholders have an active role for the well-being of the destination, as well as a sustainable destination is recognized as the key point for the well-being of the different stakeholders. New contributions on sustainable tourism remark the importance of the different stakeholders, here including partners from the tourism industry, governments and communities as groups and individuals which have different interests, goals and values but which have to be part of the process of tourism planning and development (WTO, 1995; Long, 1997; Timur and Getz, 2008). - Table 1: Main contributions on sustainable tourism Year 1987 Author(s) World Commission of Environment and Development 1995 World Travel and Tourism Council 1995 WTO 1999 Swarbrooke 1996 Richards 2002 Icomos 2002 WTO 2002 McElroy and Albuquerque Definition Forms of tourism which meet the needs of tourists, the tourism industry, and host communities today without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainable tourism has economic, ecological, and social and cultural sustainability dimensions. Economic sustainability ensures that development is economically efficient and that resources are managed in such a way that they can support future generations. Ecological sustainability is concerned with ensuring development that is compatible with the maintenance of essential ecological processes, biological diversity and biological resources. Social and cultural sustainability ensures that development increases people’s control over their lives, is compatible with the culture and values of people affected by it, and maintains and strengthens community identity. Sustainable tourism is defined as a model form of economic development that is designed to: - improve the quality of life of the host community - provide a high quality of experience for the visitor, and - maintain the quality of the environment on which both the host community and the visitor depend Sustainable tourism means tourism which is economically viable but does not destroy the resources on which the future of tourism will depend, notably the physical environment and the social fabric of the host community. Sustainable tourism is tourism which develops as quickly as possible, taking account of current accommodation capacity, the local population and the environment…The development of tourism and new investment in the tourism sector should not detract from tourism itself…New tourism facilities should be integrated with the environment. Sustainable Tourism refers to a level of tourism activity that can be maintained over the long term because it results in a net benefit for the social, economic, natural and cultural environments of the area in which it takes place. […] tourism which leads to management of all resources in such a way that economic, social and aesthetic needs can be filled while maintaining cultural integrity, essentials ecological processes, biological diversity and life support systems Sustainability ideally seeks to preserve a permanent and widely shared stream of income by creating an adaptive competitive destination niche market - 2005 Beech and Chadwick 2006 Weaver 2012 Lozano-Oyola, Blancas, González, Caballero through the ongoing guidance of participatory community planning without unacceptably sacrificing the socio-cultural and natural integrity of the asset base Sustainable tourism is tourism that is economically, socioculturally and environmentally sustainable. With sustainable tourism, sociocultural and environmental impacts are neither permanent nor irreversible. 1) […] tourism that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs 2) […] tourism that wisely uses and conserves resources in order to maintain their long-term viability. Sustainable tourism is as such not a specific form of tourism but more an approach that can be used to make all types of tourism more environmentally, socially and economically beneficial. In order to develop powerful tools for destination management, it is necessary to start identifying the key factors which can act as facilitator of a sustainable development. In this optic, the resource-based theory (RBT) is of fundamental importance since it focuses on the strategic role of local resources, of firm resources and network capabilities in gaining competitive advantage in a sustainable way. According to this optic, RBT is the expression of several links between strategic firm resources, network resources and competitive advantage. At destination level, it is useful to understand what are the key network’s competences and capabilities for the deployment of tourist services. Indeed, from the degree of specialization of these capabilities spring out the image of the destination perceived by tourists during their phase of resources’ fruition (organic level). In this way, it allows focusing on the strategic role of local resources, of firm resources and network capabilities in gaining competitive advantage in a sustainable way. 3. Methodological Approach In order to identify common procedures and policies, the paper uses a comparative case study order to describe several existent best practices possible generalizations. Through several data successful analysis in with some collections, -1 matching statistics, archives and observations, the paper identifies the major findings and qualitative results of the cases. 4. Empirical Research and Findings The empirical research is conducted on five cities that have affirmed themselves as “must-see destinations”, in order to understand the role of DMO’s in this development process and the link to sustainability: Barcelona, London, New York, Sydney and Paris. The cities have been chosen for the strategic role the DMO has assumed in favoring their development. In Barcelona, for example, the pivotal actor is the Consortium, which is responsible for the tourism development. This government entity has involved lots of members (trade associations and local actors, among the others) during the years. The Chamber of Commerce has a strategic role for the initiatives and the policies they put in place. In Sydney, the DMO has included the tourism development in its development plan in 2010, demonstrating the importance of this sector for the destination development. For what concerns London, London and Partners has the strategic role of creating and implementing marketing strategies for the tourism development, also thanks to the support of Visit London. The same is for New York, for whom the NYC and Co’s work is mainly focused on destination marketing. According to the development processes of these destinations, it is possible to assess that when the pivotal actor is created with a public-private partnership, it is easier to create an ad hoc entity for tourism development, as in the case of London and Sydney, for whom there is a dedicated subject assuming the leading role. In the case of a private or public actor, as for Barcelona or New York in the first case and Paris in the second one, there is a single subject responsible for the development. These cities demonstrate that, apart from the nature of the configuration of the DMO, right policies in management and marketing can lead to destination development. -- Table 2: Different configurations of the DMOs Destinations Barcelona London New York Paris Sydney Nature Private Public-private Private Public Public-private DMO Turisme de Barcelona London and Partners NYC and Co. Paris Info Destination New South Wales But what is the link with the sustainability? The focus on sustainability is well recognized in their strategic plans. These different cities give great importance to sustainability. Analyzing their different strategic plans, it emerges that: - Consorcio Turisme de Barcelona has created a strategic plan with a medium-range planning, aiming at a sustainable tourism development, limiting the anti-tourism phenomena that can take place when the carrying capacity is overtaken. Consorcio Turisme de Barcelona built a road map for a sustainable tourism development, starting from the achievement of Biosphere certification, being so the first destination in the world to be labeled under this name. This certification comes from the Institute of Responsible Tourism. Furthermore, Consorcio Turisme de Barcelona acts on the social component, with a special focus on disabled people, also creating an ad hoc website certified according AAA Website Accessibility Certification; - London and Partners has created a specific framework for the development of the city that gives great importance to the safety of the city and to the improvement of the quality of life for citizens and tourists. In particular, London and Partners underlines the importance of the economic and social pillar of sustainability. The governance actor, starting from the importance of the concept of “gross value added”, builds the contents for both social and economic wealth. The creation of jobs is due to the ability of the company to attract foreign investment, recording 2000 new job opportunities in 2013. In economic terms, the gross value added of London and Partners indicates the “difference between the price paid for a good or service and the cost of inputs used in its production”. Furthermore, there is an 'additional gross value added' linked to the spending capacity of leisure tourists and businessmen, event -2 organizers, travel trade operators and foreign direct investment; - New York represents a useful example of the application of the concept of sustainable development of the city and, of course, of tourism. In this direction, PlaNYC is a strategic plan about sustainability introduced by Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2007. The focus is on the environmental component of sustainability in order to reduce all the negative impacts. More precisely, the philosophy is to achieve “a greener, greater New York” (PlaNYC Progress Plan Report, 2013) according the monitoring of some variables such as housing and neighborhoods, parks and public space, brownfields, waterways, water supply, transportation, energy, air quality, solid waste and climate change.The identification of these variables has allowed to monitor the path that lead to the reduction of environmental resources, ensuring an improvement of their quality; - the sustainable tourism is a key concept that leads the strategic policies of the Paris Info. First, it is an important dimension in the hotel industry, which works hardly in reducing CO² emissions and managing wastes. Citizens have a key role in improving tourists’ experience in Paris since they support tourism activities through volunteering and local associations, showing them emblematic and unknown places. The overall city activities, including transports, ancillary services and shopping experiences are managed according to the responsibility principles. This has led Paris to partner to the 6th edition of the Responsible Tourism trophies organized by Voyages-sncf.com together with 20 partners. The aim of these events is to support local actors to activate forms of tourism that respect the environment and the local people, in order to demonstrate that “there are responsible travel options to suit all desires and pockets” (www.parisinfo.com); - as regards Destination New South Wales (DNSW), one of the main role of the governace actor is to support the development of sustainable destinations. Due to the presence of noumerous natural resources of New South Wales located all over the region (Blue Mountains, Central Coast, Central NSW, Hunter, Inland, Mid North Coast, Murray, Northern Rivers, Riverina, Snowy Mountains, -3 South Coast), the task of DNSW is to preserve these resources and promote a sustainable tourism in that areas, * also in the form of eco-tourism . Therefore, the empirical research, conducted on some mustsee destinations, highlights that: • a systemic approach at a destination level can favour the sustainable development process, integrating local and state government plans and policies, in terms of natural resource management, social, cultural and economic development, infrastructure and risk management plans and so on; • in order to achieve competitive advantage, public actors have to cooperate with the other stakeholders, favoring the relations between them and assuming a leading role; • sustainable destination management has to develop strategic and operational plans to guide tourism initiatives affecting the development, management and marketing of the destination. 5. Conclusions The findings of this research highlight strategic governance choices, as well as the role of public and private actors, in facilitating destinations sustainable development. In particular, 1) a systemic approach at a destination level can favour the sustainable development process, integrating government plans and policies, in terms of natural resource management, social, cultural and economic development, infrastructures and risk management plans etc; 2) in order to achieve competitive advantage, public actors have to cooperate with other stakeholders, favoring relationships between them and even assuming a leading role; 3) sustainable destination management * According to Isaacs (2000) “ecotourism is a proxy market designed to align consumers' preferences for recreation with the protection of environmental assets.” Furthermore, he adds that the benefits are linked to the protection of natural areas and it donates “an effort to minimize external costs of tourism”. -/ has to develop strategic and operational plans to guide tourism initiatives affecting the development, management and marketing of the destination. These results can be really helpful for DMO managers in order to define more mindful sustainable tourism policies and to identify the most relevant initiatives able to ensure this development. 6. References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Beech, J.G. and Chadwick, S. (Eds.) (2006). The Business of Tourism Management. Edinburgh: Pearson. Brundtland, G. H. (1987). World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future 89. Choi, H.C. and Sirakaya, E. (2006). Sustainability Indicators for Managing Community Tourism. Tourism Management, 27(6): 1274-1289. Della Corte, V. and Sciarelli, M. (2012). Destination Management e Logica Sistemica. Un Confronto Internazionale. Torino: Giappichelli. Douglas, C.H. (2006). Small Island States and Territories: Sustainable Development Issues and Strategies-Challenges for Changing Islands in a Changing World. Sustainable Development, 14(2): 7580. Isaacs, J.C. (2000). The Limited Potential of Ecotourism to Contribute to Wildlife Conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 28(1): 61-69. Jafari, M.A. and Shanthikumar, J.G. (1989). Determination of Optimal Buffer Storage Capacities and Optimal Allocation in Multistage Automatic Transfer Lines. IIE transactions, 21(2): 130-135. Ko, T.G. (2005). Development of a Tourism Sustainability Assessment Procedure: A Conceptual Approach. Tourism Management, 26(3): 431-445. Lim, C.C., and Cooper, C. (2009). Beyond Sustainability: Optimising Island Tourism Development. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11(1): 89-103. -4 10. Long, J.S. (1997). Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables (Vol. 7). London: Sage. 11. Lozano-Oyola, M., Blancas, F.J., González, M. and Caballero, R. (2012). Sustainable Tourism Indicators as Planning Tools in Cultural Destinations. Ecological Indicators, 18: 659-675. 12. McElroy, J.L. and Albuquerque, K. (2002). Problems for managing sustainable tourism in small islands. In: Apostolopoulos Y. and Gayle D.G. (eds.), Island Tourism and Sustainable Development: Caribbean, Pacific, and Mediterranean Experiences, (15-31). Westport: Praeger Publishers. 13. NYC and Company (2013). PlaNYC Progress Plan Report. 14. Schianetz, K., Kavanagh, L. and Lockington, D. (2007). Concepts and Tools for Comprehensive Sustainability Assessments for Tourism Destinations: A Comparative Review. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(4): 369-389. 15. Swarbrooke, J. (1999). Sustainable Tourism Management. London: Cabi. 16. Timur, S. and Getz, D. (2008). A Network Perspective on Managing Stakeholders for Sustainable Urban Tourism. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(4): 445-461. 17. Travis, A.S. (2011). Planning for Tourism, Leisure and Sustainability: International Case Studies. London: CABI. 18. Weaver, D.B. (2006). Sustainable Tourism: Theory and Practice. Routledge. 19. Wight, P.A. (1993). Sustainable Ecotourism: Balancing Economic, Environmental and Social Goals within an Ethical Framework. Journal of Tourism Studies, 4(2): 5466. 20. World Travel and Tourism Council, World Tourism Organization and Earth Council (1995). Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Industry: Towards Environmentally Sustainable Development. London: WTTC.