Factors Influencing Visitor's Choices of Urban Destinations in North ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Items from QuestionnaireTable 23: Measurement AttributesDescriptionEnvironmentVictoria has- overall environment- pleasant climate- attractive scenery- clean city- heritage ambience- friendly peopleInfrastructureVictoria has- overall infrastructure- good food- interesting attractions- good hotelsQualityVictoria hasValueVictoria offers- overall quality- overall satisfaction- quality relative to United States- overall value- reasonable prices- value for the money- value for trip- value relative to United StatesIntention to ReturnKey structural findings are as follows:- overall- return to Victoria within two years- return to other island destination within twoyearsSource: Murphy et al. (2000)• Quality was a key predictor of intention to return within two years, but perceivedtrip value was not (this finding supports H6 but rejects H7).• Quality of destination had an indirect effect on intention to return through itsinfluence on value of a trip. This means that quality should be a central focus ofdestination marketing and cities should concentrate on improving service qualityof a tourist destination (this finding supports H5). Destination marketers gain lessby focusing their promotion efforts primarily on value.• Tourism infrastructure was found to be an important predictor of both value andquality. This implies that destination marketers should seek to improve generalinfrastructure such as hotels, restaurants, attractions, etc. (this finding supports H2and H4).• Environment in terms of climate, scenery, friendliness, and cleanliness was foundto be a key predictor of quality, but only a modest predictor of value (this findingsupports H1 but only modestly H3).51
These findings support the idea that macroeconomic environment and infrastructure areimportant to the appeal of destination product and to tourist satisfaction. Bothenvironment and infrastructure factors can be linked to value and quality as perceived bytourists. At least in terms of intention to return, quality is the more important of the two.Retail Environment and Tourism Experience: Tourism product experience wascompared to the retail store experience. Baker, Grewal, and Parasurman (1994) foundthat the store environment (store design, social characteristics, etc.) and in-store serviceaffect shoppers’ experience. However, Echtner and Ritchie (1993) pointed out animportant difference between local retail and tourism retail experience. While localresidents visit the store to buy products or services, tourists primarily visit place toconsume the “atmosphere” provided by a destination. The importance of atmosphere canthen be tied to a destination image. According to Kotler, Haider and Rein (1993)destination image is a “sum of beliefs, ideas and impressions that people have of a place.”“Marketing the Competitive Destination of the Future”Buhalis (2000) introduces the idea of the destination life cycle, and notes how themarketing requirements change with the life-cycle stage (the article also notes how thelife-cycle affects the local impact of the destination shifts through the life cycle).Buhalis emphasized Ritchie and Crouch’s (1993) comprehensive model of destinationcompetitiveness for tourism organizations. According to Buhalis, the Ritchie and Crouchmodel is theoretically sound since it is based on the idea that it is a combination of factorsand their synergies that determine the attractiveness of a region (destination). Noting thatthe Ritchie and Crouch model fails to prioritize the importance of the elements, Buhalissuggests that ”a dissimilar rating should be adopted by different destinations dependingon the types of markets they attract, their life cycle stage and specific characteristics.”Relevance to Our ResearchThese articles attest to the importance of creative marketing to the tourist. The Rotterdamexperience noted by Jansen-Verbeke and Van Rekom indicates how the failure of citypromotion authorities to note similar institutions to the primary destination in theirmarketing probably limited tourist visits and spending in the city. They also point outhow this indicated a failure of city promotion officials to adequately consider themotivations of many Rotterdam visitors.Buhalis takes this idea much further by suggesting that, in addition to understanding themotivations of potential visitors, tourism marketers need to understand the life cyclestage of the destination to be promoted, and to adopt their promotional strategies to shiftsbetween stages in order to maximize both visits and spending by tourists.In his study of intentions to return, Murphy and colleagues provided more evidence forthe importance of the quality of the tourism experience, and how it should be a centralfocus of destination marketing. Consequently, cities should concentrate on improvingservice quality to their tourists. The article also emphasized how quality should extendbeyond the attraction itself to elements of tourist infrastructure.52
Page 2 and 3:
Table of ContentsI. EXECUTIVE SUMMA
Page 4 and 5: I. Executive SummaryHighlightsThe r
Page 6 and 7: Next StepsThis project has surfaced
Page 8 and 9: IV.coefficients from these models p
Page 10 and 11: series, simple autoregressive and
Page 12 and 13: Arts & Culture Museums Historymuseu
Page 14 and 15: The tourist visitations data was al
Page 16 and 17: Hotel Room Count and Hotel Property
Page 18 and 19: Table 9: Michelin’s RatingsRating
Page 20 and 21: value below one suggests that the s
Page 22 and 23: Table 13: Individual Attractions Th
Page 24 and 25: Table 16: Significant Results 14Equ
Page 26 and 27: The adjusted R 2 for this model is
Page 28 and 29: • On average across all cities, b
Page 30 and 31: Model 5C 17 : In Model 5C, the numb
Page 32 and 33: The model overpredicts the number o
Page 34 and 35: Attraction Elasticities for Ottawa
Page 36 and 37: Table 22: Marketing Budget Elastici
Page 38 and 39: VII.Technical AppendixA. Attraction
Page 40 and 41: • Metropolitan Opera House in New
Page 42 and 43: Model 3: Three-Star Quality-Rated A
Page 44 and 45: Model 5B: Three-Star Quality-Rated
Page 46 and 47: 3. The cognitive perspective involv
Page 48 and 49: also found that almost half of the
Page 50 and 51: Also, the model seems to completely
Page 52 and 53: strengths and its weaknesses, devel
Page 56 and 57: Tourism Demand/Econometric Modellin
Page 58 and 59: Table 25: Types of Explanatory Vari
Page 60 and 61: Results: Lim and McAleer found that
Page 62 and 63: Richards, Greg. (2002). “Tourism
Page 64 and 65: Figure 4: Overseas Visitors to U.S.
Page 66 and 67: Figure 6: Cities Person-Trips Volum
show all

Factors Influencing Visitor's Choices of Urban Destinations in North ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?