旅遊目的地評價分析:日本觀光客至瑞典旅遊之決策因子研究

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學管理學院管理研究所碩士論文 Graduate Institute of Management College of Management National Taiwan Normal University Master Thesis. 旅遊目的地評價分析:日本觀光客至瑞典旅遊之決策因子研究 An Analysis of Destination Judgments: the Determinant Criteria for Japanese Tourists to Travel to Sweden. 高友涵 Johan Bergsten. 指導教授：蕭中強博士 Advisor：Chung-Chiang Hsiao Ph.D. 中華民國 104 年 1 月 January, 2015.

(2) Abstract The aim of this study was to develop a deeper insight into the judgmental criteria when Japanese tourists consider Sweden as their potential travel destination. Using earlier destination competitiveness factors as a basis, 16 factors were evaluated both by Japanese potential tourists and Swedish tourism experts in the form of two online surveys. Their judgments were analyzed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to come up with factor weights for each of the factors, in order to find out if there was a fit between the factors that Japanese tourists regarded as important, and the factors where tourism experts considered Sweden as competitively strong. Results showed that the Japanese tourists regarded natural resources, especially the climate, as well as adventure activities and accommodation to be important when considering Sweden as a destination. Results also showed that tourism experts regarded Sweden’s natural resources to be competitively strong, especially the natural scenery. Keywords: destination marketing, destination competitiveness, attribute importance, analytic hierarchy process, Sweden, Japanese tourists.

(3) Dedication To my parents Lisbeth and Mikael Bergsten, for their endless love, support and encouragement.

(4) Acknowledgments The writing process of this master thesis have been very interesting and educating, both because of the opportunity to bridge destination marketing theory and practice, and for learning new research techniques and data analysis methods, like the analytical hierarchy process. First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis advisor, ChungChiang Hsiao, for his excellent guidance, caring and patience during this research process. Without him I would never have been able to finish this thesis. I would like to thank the committee members Nai-Hwa Lien, Yi-Wen Chien and ChienWei Chen for giving me important suggestions and advice during the thesis writing process. I would like to thank Chie Hayashi, who assisted me in the translation of the original English questionnaire to the Japanese language. I would also like to thank all participants in the online surveys for taking their time to fill in the questionnaires.. Johan Bergsten [email protected].

(5) Table of contents Introduction .....................................................................................................................1 Background ....................................................................................................................1 Trends in the global tourism industry ........................................................................1 Economic benefits of Sweden’s tourism industry ..................................................2 Characteristics of Sweden’s tourism industry ........................................................3 Nature tourism ......................................................................................................3 Culture tourism .....................................................................................................4 Problem definition .........................................................................................................5 Theoretical framework....................................................................................................8 Literature review ............................................................................................................8 Tourism definition and history....................................................................................8 Motivation theory: needs and wants .......................................................................9 Needs and motivations of tourists .........................................................................10 Destination marketing ...........................................................................................12 Destination branding .............................................................................................13 Destination competitiveness .................................................................................14 Methodology ...................................................................................................................18 Participants ...................................................................................................................19 Measures ......................................................................................................................19 AHP methodology ....................................................................................................19 The supply side: Tourism experts ............................................................................22 The demand side: Japanese tourists .........................................................................22 Main factors and sub factors used ............................................................................23 Procedure of data collection........................................................................................24 Data analysis ...............................................................................................................25 Results .............................................................................................................................26 The demand side: Japanese tourists .............................................................................26 Demographic data ....................................................................................................26 Competing destinations ............................................................................................29 AHP factor weights ..................................................................................................31.

(6) Pair wise mean comparison of factor rankings ........................................................35 The supply side: Tourism experts’ opinions ...............................................................39 Competing destinations ............................................................................................39 AHP factor weights ..................................................................................................40 General discussion .........................................................................................................45 Discussion and implications ........................................................................................45 Research question 1: Determinant factors ...............................................................45 Research question 2: Fit between supply and demand factors ...............................47 Research question 3: Marketing and positioning strategy ......................................48 Limitations and recommendations for future research ................................................48 References.......................................................................................................................52 Appendices .....................................................................................................................54 Copies of the online questionnaires .............................................................................54.

(7) Introduction Background When I heard about Taiwan for the first time, it was a Swedish person living there describing it as the most beautiful island in the world, full of stunning mountains, coastlines and beaches. However, he was perplexed that the Taiwanese people did not seem to appreciate all of this. He told me about the most beautiful beaches he had ever seen, all empty and deserted, with no one enjoying the sand, the water and the sunshine being offered. When I several years later moved to Taiwan myself, and traveled to the Penghu Islands, I got the opportunity to witness this with my own eyes. We rented a car driving around the main island seeing a lot of empty beaches, with white sand and azure blue water. It was what Swedish people would describe as "paradise" beaches, where you could lie in the sand enjoying life without anyone disturbing you. It seemed that our travel motivations, two Swedish people, differed completely from the local Taiwanese. While we were looking for stillness, peace, and becoming "one" with nature, the local tourists went on organized trips packed with people, to crowded, but famous spots where they could enjoy water activities, snorkeling and fishing together with dozens of other travelers. This experience made me more and more interested in the perceptions of tourists, how these can differ between cultures, and what motivates people to choose a particular destination. And above all, how this knowledge can be used for conducting efficient marketing. and. positioning. your. destination. to. a. particular. market.. Trends in the global tourism industry. According to a report issued by the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) in 2011, global tourism will continue to grow in the period 2010 - 2030, with an average 3.3% per year. According to these calculations, about 43 million additional international tourists will join the tourism market every year. In a world that is becoming increasingly globalized, with a constantly growing number of people who wants to and can afford to travel to foreign 1.

(8) countries, tourism is now an important part of most countries’ economies. But with the world’s nearly 200 countries all trying to attract foreign visitors, the competition is also very fierce. It is crucial to make your destination stay competitive through branding and marketing and understanding your target customers’ needs. While the largest increases in the global tourism market shares will be seen in emerging economies in Asia, the Pacific, the Middle East and Africa, Europe will see a growth of almost 60% from 2010 to 2030, which is equal to an annual growth of 2.3%.. The largest proportion of these tourists the next two decades will originate from Asian countries, growing at a rate of 5% per year and creating about 17 million additional arrivals every year. Europe follows next with an average of 16 million arrivals every year, followed by the Americas (5 million), Africa (3 million) and the Middle East (2 million).This shows the importance of Asia, and countries that want to increase their market shares of the global tourism market must keep positioning themselves to meet the needs of travel consumers in this region. Economic benefits of Sweden’s tourism industry. According to a recent tourism industry report issued by the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth in June 2014, Sweden’s total tourism revenue grew by 3.9% to 284.4 billion Swedish crowns in 2013. This shows that the tourism industry is an important income source for the country. Foreign tourists spent 105.7 billion crowns in Sweden, while Swedish travelers spent 178.8 billion crowns. The largest part was spent on accommodation and restaurants, followed by transportation and shopping expenses. Consumption of culture and recreational activities stood for a smaller part. Money spent by a tourist in a foreign country affects the total value of exports and imports in the countries’ balance of payments. Swedish tourists’ expenses in foreign countries equal import, while foreign tourists’ expenses in Sweden equals export in the Swedish balance of payments. Foreign visitors create a flow of foreign currency into Sweden and the tourism industry can be regarded as an export industry, just like any other product or service export industry. During 2013, the export value of tourism in 2.

(9) Sweden was higher than several important product sectors’ export values. The export value of tourism reached 105.7 million crowns during 2013, which is higher than the combined value of food exports (53.4 million crowns) and the iron and steel export (46.9 million crowns). The export value of tourism also increases higher than the total export value of Sweden. This means that tourism’s share of the total exports in Sweden has increased, from 3.9% in 2000 to 6.4% in 2013. Tourism also helps increasing employment. 173,000 people were employed in the tourism sector in Sweden 2013, and it has been growing with 32% since 2000. Sweden’s total employment grew with 9% during the same period. The majority of these people were employed in the hotel and restaurant industry, but also in the trading of goods, travel agencies and the transport industry. The people employed in tourism sector were higher than the total amount of people employed in many of the largest Swedish companies. The positive economic effects of a prospering tourism industry on a nation’s revenue, total export value and employment numbers are therefore clearly important. It will be of vital importance for Sweden to keep staying attractive as a destination target for foreign tourists, especially the Asian markets, which has a high potential for growth in the future. Characteristics of Sweden’s tourism industry. Visitsweden.com, Sweden’s official travel and tourist information web site describes Sweden as a country with a distinctive blend of ultra-modernity and history, with a sublime natural beauty. Fresh air, clean water, open spaces and beautiful views are abundant and easily accessible for everyone to enjoy, even inside the main cities. Nature tourism. As a vast but sparsely populated country, nature still dominates civilization in Sweden. It is a long, north-south oriented country, which results in a large variation in landscape, and because of its northern location, there are dramatic variations between the four seasons and all of the seasons have its own unique charm. In the northernmost mountain region of Lapland, there are natural attractions like the midnight sun in the summer and the polar night and northern lights during winter.. 3.

(10) Sweden’s central part is covered with large areas of forests and lakes, where activities like river rafting and fishing are available. It is also popular to cycle along the gravel roads, lakes and forests there. The east and west coasts consists of archipelagos with a lot of different small islands with their own natural beauty. Skåne in the very south of the country is characterized by hills, fields, forests and fertile agricultural lands. Visitsweden.com also writes about how accessible the nature is from the urban areas, within 30 minutes of all cities areas of natural beauty are accessible. Sweden’s wildlife includes bears, wolves, moose, beavers, seals, otters and lynx. According to Visitsweden.com, Bear Safaris have become increasingly popular and makes for a close encounter with nature. There are plenty of adventure activities like cycling, rafting, paddling and hiking available. Culture tourism. Visitsweden.com describes Sweden’s history as long, rich and diversified, and it has resulted in a lot of interesting historical sites. One example is the medieval town of Visby, which is included on UNESCO’s World Heritage List. It is located on the island of Gotland and is a peaceful, restful place with a sophisticated selection of culture, restaurants and hotels. Another example of history is Stockholm’s historical Old Town which is Europe’s largest and best-preserved medieval city center, and dates back to the 13th century. Close to the Old town lies the Royal Palace and lots of museums to keep the culturally interested tourist busy for several days. Stockholm, the capital, has been described as a spectacular mix of nature, land and water. According to Visitsweden.com, it has all the advantages of a modern global metropolis: culture, shopping, restaurants, entertainment, without the downsides of crowds, traffic and pollution. In Stockholm you can visit unique museums like the ABBA museum, built in memory to the world famous Swedish pop group from the 70’s. There is possible to go on an ABBA City Walk arranged by the Stockholm City Museum and visit ABBA-related sites of interest. Other major cities include Gothenburg, located by the Atlantic Sea and a center of shipping and commerce. It offers a rich selection of culture, shopping, sights and. 4.

(11) nightlife. It has a wide range of first class restaurants and is famous for its seafood. Sweden’s third largest city is Malmö, which is linked to the Danish capital of Copenhagen by the Öresund Bridge. The cityscape is influenced by countries like Denmark and Germany and it has been described as a multicultural melting pot with food markets, stores and restaurants from all over the world. Visitsweden.com also describes it as an art city, with lots of interesting art galleries and museums. Northern Sweden also has its own unique culture, the Sami culture, which is one of Sweden’s indigenous people. The Sami people have their own language, culture and customs. An important part of Swedish history is the Vikings. They were seafarers who raided and traded other countries from their homelands of Scandinavia. One of Sweden’s first real towns, Birka, was a central hub and important marketplace during the Viking times. Today it has a wealth of ancient remains that have been excavated and studied since the 19th century and is easily accessible from Stockholm.. Problem Definition In a recent report on accommodation statistics in 2013 from Statistics Sweden, a government agency responsible for producing official data, statistics on foreign tourists’ nights spent in hotels, holiday villages and youth hostels was published for the years 2004-2013. When examining these data more closely, I found that the visitors from Asian countries like China, South Korea, India and Taiwan all had increased during the past 10 years. The number of visitors from “the rest of Asia” had also increased. However, one country was an exception to this trend: Japan. Visitor numbers from Japan to Sweden had decreased from 118,000 in 2004 to 90,000 in 2013. For example South Korean tourists had increased from 15,000 in 2004 to 32,000 in 2013. Chinese visitors had increased from 23,000 in 2004 to 190,000 in 2013. The global financial crisis of 2007-2008 had a great negative impact on the tourism industry all over the world. However, many countries have since then recovered from this and once again show the high numbers that they had before the crisis. Japan is not an exception. According to data from the World Bank, Japanese outbound international tourists were 17,404,000 in 2005 and 17,535,000 in 2006. During the crisis years of 5.

(12) 2008 and 2009, the numbers decreased to 15,987,000 and 15,446,000 respectively. By 2012 the Japanese outbound tourists had already recovered and reached 18,491,000, the highest numbers in years, showing that Japanese people are once again willing and able to travel around the world. However, their travel patterns seem to have changed. When looking closer at the Japanese tourist numbers to different individual countries in a report from JTM (Japanese Tourist Marketing Co.), one can clearly see that traditional well-known destinations like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France and Germany all have decreased their share of Japanese tourists. Meanwhile, emerging economies in South East Asia like Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia have increased their share. In Europe, the numbers show that relatively newly developed tourist destinations like Croatia and Slovenia also have increased their share of Japanese tourists. This indicates intensified competition between older, established tourist destinations which lose visitors to destinations in newly emerging tourist countries. The decrease of Japanese tourists to Sweden is worrying. One other reason behind it might be that VisitSweden, the official tourism promotion organization, left Japan several years ago to focus on European countries, as well as the US, Russia and China. These countries have all increased their amount of visitors to Sweden during the period 2004-2013. Japan, with its big population of 126.5 million people and a reputation of its tourists as “big spenders” (Mok 2001), should not be underestimated as an important future source of tourists to Sweden. When the Japanese economy recovers again, Sweden needs to have established a well defined position towards the Japanese market.. This year, a new destination marketing website for Sweden was launched in Japanese by the Sweden Culture and Tourism Center (STTC), along with two social media accounts for Twitter and Facebook, with the goal of boosting Japanese tourism to Sweden. However, in order for measures like these to become successful, it is necessary to do research on the perceptions of Japanese tourists and which factors that are most important when they choose travel destinations.. 6.

(13) The purpose of this thesis is to find out which factors are the most important to increase the competitiveness of Sweden as a destination, when marketing to Japanese tourists.. It aims to solve the following research questions. -. What are the most important factors when Japanese consumers choose travel destinations online?. -. Is there a fit between those important factors and Sweden’s competitively strong factors?. -. How should Sweden as a destination be marketed and positioned to the Japanese market in order to increase Japanese tourists?. 7.

(14) Literature Review This research draws on three main areas of research: prior studies on the needs and motivations of tourists, destination marketing and branding, and destination competitiveness. Tourism Definition and History The United Nations World Tourism Organization defines the word tourism as “a social, cultural and economic phenomenon which entails the movement of people to countries or places outside their usual environment for personal or business/professional purposes. These people are called visitors and tourism has to do with their activities, some of which imply tourism expenditure.” The history of tourism is long and its roots go back as far as Egypt under the pharaohs, several thousand years ago, where people with luxurious lifestyles would start journeys in search of amusement, experience and relaxation. They visited famous monuments of ancient Egyptian culture, for example the Sphinx and the pyramids. The classical Greeks had similar traditions and traveled to Delphi to question the Oracle, participated in the Pythian and the early Olympic Games. In classical Rome, a road network of 90,000 kilometers of major roads and 200,000 kilometers of smaller rural roads existed, which facilitated not only the transport of soldiers, but also private traveling. Rich Romans in search of relaxation traveled to seaside resorts in the South or to spend time on beaches in Egypt and Greece. Here, the first “bathing holidays” started. During the Middle Ages, journeys to famous educational institutions became a custom and an important part of education for scholars. The motivation for travels changed and became a tool for self-realization. In the 16th and 18th centuries, young nobles who wanted to broaden their education went out on the classic Grand Tour, which lasted between one and three years. Every part of the journey was planned down to the smallest detail and included visits to classical sites in Europe, including London, Rome, Paris and Vienna.. 8.

(15) Thomas Cook, an English entrepreneur, invented the world’s first organized group holidays in the 1840’s. He offered guided holidays abroad for all kinds of people, from rich to poor and had great success in creating all-inclusive holidays and introduced vouchers for hotels and tourist brochures. He served a pioneering role in the development of what later would become the mass tourism industry. During the post-war period, the world was characterized by economic growth and rapid technological advancements, and this led to a boom for tourism development. Rising affluence, urbanization and the shortening of working hours were all important factors. Bus and rail travel was replaced by car and air transportation, and charter tourism was established as a cheap alternative for foreign holidays. People could now travel to distant countries and destinations without much effort. Motivation Theory: Needs and Wants Marketing has been defined as “the science and art of exploring, creating, and delivering value to satisfy the needs of a target market at a profit”. An important first step of marketing is to understand customer needs and wants, and even more important, what motivates human behavior in general. In 1943, the psychologist Abraham Maslow introduced his concept of a hierarchy of needs. He proposed the idea that people are motivated to fulfill basic needs before moving on to higher, more advanced needs. He was interested in learning about what makes people happy and what they need to do to achieve it. This hierarchy is often displayed as a pyramid, with the most basic needs at the bottom level and the more complex needs at the top. At the lowest level lie physiological needs. They are the most basic needs that humans need for survival, like the need for water, food, air and sleep. All other needs become secondary until these physiological needs are met. At the next level lie security and safety needs. These are also quite important for surviving. Examples include employment, health care and living in a safe neighborhood. The third level consists of social needs, and includes the need for love, belonging and affection. These are less basic than physiological and security needs. Examples include friendships, romantic attachments, family bonds and involvement in social or religious groups. When the first three levels and needs have been satisfied, the fourth level, 9.

(16) esteem, becomes important. It includes self-esteem, personal worth, accomplishment and social recognition. At the top level lie the self-actualizing needs. These are concerned with personal growth and how to fulfill one’s potential. The first four levels are usually called deficiency needs, which mean they are important in order to avoid unpleasant feelings or consequences. The highest level needs are usually called growth needs, and does not stem from a lack of something, but instead from a desire to grow as a person. The goal for the marketer is to understand each level of needs for its customers and develop marketing communications that address those needs. Another important concept of marketing is human wants. Wants are the form human needs take as they are shaped by culture and individual personality. A hungry person needs food but may want a hamburger, noodle soup or spaghetti depending on their individual differences. Wants and needs are often mixed up. An example is the manufacturer of drill bits that believes the customer needs a drill bit, but what the customer really needs is a hole. Marketers who focus only on existing wants and do not see the underlying customer needs may get in trouble because the ultimate goal of marketing is to satisfy customer’s needs. Needs and motivations of Tourists By looking at the history of tourism, it can clearly be seen that the motives for traveling have changed through the ages. In the ancient world, people travelled for pleasure and to visit famous monuments and attractions. The Roman tourists was seeking escape and relaxation, while during the Middle Ages spiritual growth and personal development were a big travel motivator. In the 16th and 18th centuries, education was an important motivator. People’s motives and needs change not only over time, but also depends on place and social company. The motives for visiting a national park together with your family will be different from those for visiting a theme park together with a group of friends. Pearce (2005) used Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and expanded it to describe tourist motivation as consisting of five different levels: physiological and relaxation needs,. 10.

(17) safety and stimulation needs, relationship needs, self-esteem and development needs, and fulfillment needs. Just like in Maslow’s model, the needs of tourists were seen as structured in a hierarchy with the relaxation needs at the bottom level and the fulfillment needs at the top. He considered travelers to have more than one level of travel motivation, but one set of needs in the different levels might be dominant. You might go on a trip to see your family (a relationship need), to relax on the beach (a physiological need), and because you are curious to see and learn about the destination (a selfdevelopment need). The needs may also be self-directed (for example relaxation) or be directed at others (like opportunities to meet new people and friends). Different people travel for different reasons, and the same destination will attract a range of different people with different needs and motivations. Chon (1990) wrote about travel motivation as consisting of “push” and “pull” factors. The push factors exist inside travelers’ minds in the form of needs that they believe can be fulfilled through various types of travels. They are the forces that push tourists towards a certain destination. In Pearce’s model, these push factors are the different needs described, such as the need to relax, the need to escape and the need for status. The pull factors are the forces that pull travelers towards a certain destination. They exist at the destination and determine whether or not the travelers’ needs (push factors) will be met. The pull factors can be divided into primary, secondary and tertiary pull factors. The primary pull factors can be scenery (mountains, beaches), cities (New York, Paris), climate (warm, sunny, cold, etc.), wildlife, historical and cultural attractions and means of travel (e.g. cruises can be an attraction of itself). The secondary pull factors are accommodation (e.g. guest house, luxury hotel), catering (trying out local food), personal attention and service (health spas, five-star hotels), entertainment (theatres and night clubs), sport (the World Cup, Olympic games), ease of access for tourists (easiness of obtaining visas), political conditions, and various trends in tourism (e.g. sustainable tourism, adventure travel etc.). Tertiary pull factors are marketing (the way in which a destination is marketed) and price levels. Klenosky (2011) saw the push and pull factors as lying on a continuum with the pull factors as the tangible attributes on one end and the push factors as the intangible needs, motivations and personal values on the other end. 11.

(18) The goal of tourism marketing is to influence the needs and motivations (push factors) of the tourist and show how these needs can be met by the offers (pull factors) that a destination has. The marketer has to ensure that the tangible pull factors of the destination match the intangible push factors of the tourist. It is difficult to exactly identify which factor has more influence on the final decision or which factor that comes into play before the other. However, it is generally believed that the push factors lead to the decision, but the pull factors can be equally important in influencing the tourist’s final decision (Robinson 2012). Destination Marketing Marketing a destination is very different from marketing a product. It is a very complicated form of marketing due to the fact that the destination is neither controlled nor owned by one single company or entity. The destination is made up of many suppliers and service providers, and marketing it involves complex and coordinating action among the central public and private attractions that attracts tourists to the region, the transportation network to connect visitors to the various attractions, the hospitality services to fill the basic needs, and information to help tourists meet needs and find their way (Uysal 2000). In contrast to a manufactured product, a tourism destination may be regarded as a mixture of individual products and experience opportunities that combine to form a total experience of the area visited (Murphy et al. 2000). Wahab et al (1976) offered the first definition of tourism destination marketing: "The management process through which the National Tourist Organizations and/or tourist enterprises identify their selected tourists, actual and potential, communicate with them to ascertain and influence their wishes, needs, motivations, likes and dislikes, on local, regional, national and international levels, and to formulate and adapt their tourist products accordingly in view of achieving optimal tourist satisfaction thereby fulfilling their objectives." Different levels of government are involved in the promotion, presentation, regulation, planning, coordination, and managing of tourism resources. Destination management. 12.

(19) organizations (DMOs) include national and regional tourism organizations as well as convention and visit bureaus, and they have overall responsibility for the entire destination product (Buhalis 2000). DMOs have three important functions: coordination, the provision of information, and monitoring and evaluation (Dwyer et al 2003). The primary function is to serve as a coordinating body for the different public and private sector organizations involved in tourism. It also provides the leadership and the overall direction for tourism development within the destination. An effective use of information systems can help managers understand customer needs and develop new products, as well as helping the marketing of the destination. Research results can help the DMO to better adapt to changing market conditions and identify market problems and opportunities. Monitoring and strategically scanning the competitive environment is also an important part of policy and strategy formulation for DMOs. Finally, the evaluation of the effectiveness of major policies and strategies that have been implemented is also of vital importance. Destination Branding Just like product branding is an important part of product marketing, destination branding is an important part of destination marketing. Aaker (1996) defined a brand as a multidimensional assortment of functional, emotional, relational and strategic elements that collectively generate a unique set of associations in the public mind. It is more than just the brand’s name and logo. It is a large set of images, meanings, associations and experiences in people’s minds. Just like products are associated with images in customer’s minds, places, countries and destinations also have associations and are also brands themselves. The branding of countries, nation branding, is a relatively new subject which origin can be traced back to Papadopoulos and Heslop’s (1993) paper on country of origin effects and Kotler and Gertner’s (2002) paper on place marketing. Simon Anholt is often credited with creating the term nation branding and has described a nation’s brand image as its most valuable asset: “it is national identity made robust, tangible,. 13.

(20) communicable and at its best made useful” (Anholt 2005). In today’s globalized world, all countries compete with each other for the attention, respect and trust of investors, tourists, consumers, immigrants and the media, and that is why a powerful and positive nation brand provides an important competitive advantage. According to Fan (2010), a nation brand is the total sum of all perceptions of a nation in the minds of international stakeholders, which may be any of the following: people, place, culture/language, history, food, fashion, celebrities, global brands and so on. A nation brand exists for every country, with or without any conscious branding efforts, as all countries has a certain image to its international audience, either clear or vague, strong or weak, current or outdated. It is important not to confuse a nation brand with a national brand. A national brand refers to a specific product or service that is distributed nationwide. A nation brand refers to a mental image of the country that is held by foreign people. Destination Competitiveness As mentioned above, a strong national brand can be helpful when competing with other destinations to attract foreign tourists to one’s country. Just like consumer products, tourist destinations must persuade its customers that they can satisfy their needs and offer a combination of benefits that no one else can. The difference, and challenge, when improving destination’s competitiveness is that tourism as a product is not produced by a single company, but by all companies and organizations that are involved in the visitors’ experience. This involves hotels, airlines, restaurants, tour operators as well as supporting industries like entertainment, sports and recreation industries. Destination management organizations, the public sector (who provides infrastructure) and local residents are also involved in this (Crouch 2010). This makes the management of the destination more complex compared to the management of simple products produced by one single firm. According to Crouch (2010), tourism researchers have during the past couple of decades sought to develop a theoretical and conceptual basis for understanding and measuring destination competitiveness. A number of different types of research studies have been conducted in the field. 14.

(21) Some of them have focused on particular aspects of destination competitiveness, for example destination positioning (Chacko 1998), destination marketing (Buhalis 2000), price competitiveness (Dwyer, Forsyth, and Rao 2000) and destination management systems (Baker, Hayzelden, and Sussmann 1996). Other research has tried to develop general models and theories of destination competitiveness, not specific to any particular destinations, tourists or attributes. Crouch and Ritchie (1999) started to study the nature and structure of destination competitiveness in 1992, with the aim of constructing a conceptual model based on the theories of competitive advantage, tailored to the characteristics of destination competition. Their model is based on the concept that a destination’s resource endowments (comparative advantage), as well as its capacity to deploy resources (competitive advantage) affects a destination’s competitiveness. It also takes into consideration. macroenvironmental. forces. and. competitive. microenvironmental. circumstances that affect the tourism system associated with the destination. In total, 36 attributes or factors were identified, each clustered into five main groups. Dwyer and Kim (2003) also developed a general model of destination competitiveness. The main elements of their model include resources comprising natural resources (e.g. lakes, coasts, mountains, and general scenic features) and heritage (e.g. language, cuisine, customs, and handicrafts), created resources (e.g. tourism infrastructure, shopping, special events), supporting resources (e.g. general infrastructure, service quality, accessibility). The model shows how resources and destination management (government and industry) interacts with tourism demand and situational conditions to influence destination competitiveness and socioeconomic prosperity.. 15.

(22) The third type of research in the field is studies with the aim of diagnosing the competitive positions of specific destinations. These studies include the United States (Ahmed and Krohn 1990), Hong Kong (Enright and Newton 2004), Spain and Turkey (Kozak 2003). Crouch (2010) wanted to further develop the general model of destination competitiveness that existed. He thought it unlikely that all the factors would be of equal importance or influence in determining the competitive fortunes of the destinations in general, or of individual destinations in specific market segments. He therefore wanted to focus the research on assessing the relative importance of these attributes. He found the ten most important attributes to be physiography and climate, mix of activities, culture and history, tourism superstructure, safety/security, cost/value, accessibility, special events, awareness/image, location, and infrastructure. This was still a very general view of the relative importance of the attributes, and he concluded that more research is needed to investigate the relative importance of attributes as they apply to particular segments of the tourism market. This is one of the reasons why I have chosen to research the marketing of Sweden as a destination to the Japanese market.. 16.

(23) 17.

(24) Methodology This section describes the methods that were used to collect data and carry out the research in this study. It consists of a description of the participants involved, the measures that were used, the procedures used to collect the data and how the data analysis was carried out. The study consists of data collected from two parts: industry experts on the supply side, and Japanese consumers on the demand side. When the tourism industry experts’ perceptions of Sweden’s strong points have been collected, they will be compared with the factors that Japanese consumers think are important when choosing destinations. If the consumers believe that one specific factor is important, and Sweden is competitively strong at that same factor, a match between supply side and demand side factors exists, and things related to that factor should be emphasized and used when marketing Sweden as a destination and communicating to the Japanese tourism market.. 18.

(25) Participants The purpose of this thesis was to find out what the determinant factors were when Japanese tourists choose travel destinations, and how Swedish tourism should be marketed and positioned to the Japanese market. In order to do this, participants from both the supply side and the demand side was needed. Firstly, it was important to identify Sweden’s uniqueness as a destination and determine its core competences and strong points, and how it compares to its closest destination competitors on these points. For this part, 5 different tourism experts and people with experience working inside the tourism industry were chosen to represent the supply side of tourism. They were all employed in large, Swedish tourism organizations. In the end, 4 of these samples were considered as complete and useable. To identify the most determinant factors when Japanese tourists choose destinations, I also had to go to the demand side of tourism and find out what Japanese consumers believe are the most important factors. 93 Japanese people participated in the survey, but due to missing data, only 68 could be considered complete and useable. Demographic data of the participants were also collected.. Measures AHP methodology. Decisions or judgments require the weighing up of an array of information regarding different criteria or attributes. Various multi attribute decisionmaking techniques have been developed to study or facilitate decision-making. Moutinho, Rita, and Curry (1996) have examined the application of these kinds of methods in a tourism context and have identified the advantages of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). AHP is a structured technique for organizing and analyzing complex decisions, based on mathematics and psychology. They wrote that “decisions which face tourism planners typically involve variables which are difficult to measure directly, and even if all variables can be measured accurately there are still severe problems to be faced in obtaining numeric measures of the relative importance of decision variables. The AHP was designed as an all-purpose method for achieving these aims”.. 19.

(26) They also wrote that “Managerial decision making in tourism is a complex, multivariate process. Effective decision-support models need to be capable of incorporating a wide range of environmental variables, many of which may be extremely different to quantify. Moreover, decision makers are also required to achieve a balance between a range of conflicting objectives” (Curry and Moutinho 1992). Using AHP, all decisions can be structured in the form of a decision hierarchy or tree (Figure 3.1). The apex of the hierarchy is the outcome of a decision and the other layers represent factors of the decision criteria. The main branches represent the main decision factors and the sub branches divide these into sub factors. The lowest level of the hierarchy specifies each of the alternatives or possible decision options under consideration (Crouch 2010). All participants will conduct a series of pair wise comparisons for all factors. Each judgment involves the participant making a decision about the relative importance of two items at a time, and these pair wise judgments are required for all possible pair wise combinations. Using this method, it is also possible to identify inconsistent judgments. For example, if Factor 1 is judged to be more important than Factor 2, and Factor 2 more important than Factor 3, and the participant then judges Factor 3 to be more important than Factor 1, the participant then will be told to check and modify his answers.. 20.

(27) When a participant has entered the judgments at each node of the decision tree, and these have been checked for consistency, the result will be a matrix of judgments that indicates the relative importance of the row-column pair combination. AHP will then reduce this matrix to an eigenvector of weights, summing to the value of one, which indicates the relative importance of each item in the set of items for that node in the decision tree. These eigenvector weights belong to a particular parent or branch node in the decision tree, rather than to the decision goal, and are termed local weights. When all judgments for all nodes has been completed, the AHP will be able to combine the eigenvectors across the different levels of the hierarchy to produce global weights that sum to the value of one at each level of the hierarchy, rather than at each node of the decision tree (Crouch 2010). The focus of the data collection and analysis will be on the importance and competitive strength of the decision criteria. AHP has been used extensively over the last 30 years in a wide range of fields and contexts and has a scientific basis in mathematical psychology. Applications in tourism. 21.

(28) contexts include Ananda and Herath (2002), Chen (2006) and Deng, King and Bauser (2002). To identify the most important competitive attributes and factors, earlier research on destination competitiveness was used (Crouch 2010, Dwyer and Kim 2003). The 36 determinant factors and attributes of destination competitiveness were used as a basis, but were modified to better suit the unique position that Sweden as a destination has. Four main factors and twelve sub factors that were considered to be relevant to Sweden and the Japanese consumers' were chosen as the basis for this study. The first main factor was Natural Resources, with the sub factors Natural Scenery, Climate and Wildlife. The second main factor was Cultural Resources with the sub factors History, Cultural Arts and Cuisine. The third main factor was Tourism Infrastructure with the sub factors Accommodation, Transportation and Service. The fourth main factor was Range of Activities, with the sub factors Adventure activities, Cultural activities and Recreational Activities. The supply side: tourism experts. For the supply side, the tourism experts were asked to first name two countries that they considered to be Sweden's closest tourism competitors. They were then asked to rank these two competitors and Sweden according to their overall competitiveness as international tourism destinations. They were then asked to rank and rate all the main factors and sub factors according to Sweden's competitive strength as a tourism destination on all factors. The comparisons were all made pair-wise according to the AHP method. The measures ranged from Extremely Strong, Very Strong, Strong, Slightly Strong, Equally Strong, Slightly Weak, Weak, Very Weak and Extremely Weak. The demand side: Japanese tourists. For the demand side, the Japanese consumers were asked to first name two countries that they considered to be Sweden's closest tourism competitors. They were then asked to rank the two competitors and Sweden according to where they would like to go the most. They were then asked to rank and rate all the main factors and sub factors according to their importance if they were considering the above mentioned three countries as 22.

(29) potential travel destinations. The comparisons were all made pair-wise according to the AHP method. The measures ranged from Extremely Important, Very Important, Important, Slightly Important, Equally Important, Slightly Unimportant, Unimportant, Very Unimportant and Extremely Unimportant. Main factors and sub factors used. The factors used in this study were all based on earlier studies on destination competitiveness by Crouch (2010) and Dwyer and Kim (2003). They were modified and reduced to better suit the purpose and the participants of this study. All participants were presented with a short definition text explaining the meaning of all the main factors and sub factors. For the main factors, Natural Resources points to all the resources that have been naturally endowed and related to the environment at a destination. They include scenery, climate and wildlife. Cultural Resources points to all the resources that have been created and developed by the society and the people of the destination. They include history, cultural arts and cuisine. Tourism infrastructure points to resources built to enhance tourists’ experiences and value at a destination. They include accommodation, transportation and service quality. Range of Activities points to the mix of available types of activities that are offered to tourists visiting the destination. They include adventure activities, cultural activities and recreational activities. For the Natural Resources sub factors, Natural Scenery points to the natural environment and wonders visitors can enjoy. It includes lakes, rivers, mountains, forests, waterfalls and national parks. Climate points to the type of weather and temperature that exists at a destination. It also includes the different seasonal characteristics that exist: spring, summer, fall and winter. Wildlife points to the wild animals and species that can be seen at a destination, and its diversity and uniqueness. For the Cultural Resources sub factors, History points to the historical and heritage sites, unique traditional customs, museums and institutions that can be found at a destination. Cultural Arts points to all kinds of creative arts like music, literature, film, architecture and paintings that are associated with the destination. Cuisine points to the characteristic style of cooking practices that are associated with the destination. It includes the quality and variety of regional dishes unique to the destination. 23.

(30) For the Tourism Infrastructure sub factors, Accommodation points to the quality and variety of the hotels, hostels and holiday villages of a destination. Transportation points to the efficiency and quality of the local transportation facilities, like public transportation, car rental services, airport buses etc. It includes how visitors travel inside cities, from city to city, and the accessibility of scenic areas. Service points to the quality of services to visitors provided at the destination. It includes the service level of hotels and restaurants, the perceived friendliness of the local population and their attitude towards tourists, and the tourist guidance and information that is available to visitors. For the Range of Activities sub factors, Adventure activities points to exciting, unusual and bold experiences, and are expected to create psychological arousal. They include mountain climbing, river rafting, skydiving and canoeing etc. Cultural activities points to activities that are related to experiencing and learning about the people, history, lifestyle and religion of the destination. They include tourism in urban areas, cultural facilities like museums, festivals and traditions etc. Recreational activities points to activities that promote relaxation, reduce stress, give pleasure or enjoyment. They include going to the beach, shopping, sports and theme parks etc.. Procedure of Data Collection Data were collected through online survey questionnaires. The questionnaires were both constructed by using Survey Monkey, which provide both a tool for designing the surveys and also a server with a web link to facilitate the distribution of the questionnaire after it was completed. Both questionnaires were first constructed using English, and the one aimed at Japanese consumers were then translated into Japanese by the author together with a native speaking Japanese person. The goal was to have the Japanese version as close to the original text as possible. The questionnaire aimed for the tourism experts were conducted using the original English version. Participants were contacted via internet, using e-mail and social networks. Facebook were used to get in contact with most of the participants. Friends of the author were. 24.

(31) contacted and were encouraged to forward the questionnaire to their friends. The questionnaire also included a detailed definition list of all the involved factors, so that participants would have a consistent view of all the factors. They were also actively encouraged to carefully read all the included factor definitions. The demand side questionnaire also included a demographic questions part, to get a more detailed analysis of the different tourists' characteristics and habits. They included questions regarding age, sex, occupation, education, travel habits and preferences and income. The supply side did not include a demographic questions part, since it was not regarded as important for assessing the competitively strong points of Sweden. Exact copies of all the questionnaires are provided in the appendix section.. Data Analysis When a participant had entered their judgments at all factors, the result was a matrix of judgments that indicated the relative importance or strength of the row-column pair combination. AHP then reduces that matrix to an eigenvector of weights, summing to the value of one, which indicates the relative importance or strength of each item in the set of factors in the decision tree. Those eigenvector weights pertain to a particular branch node in the decision tree and are there termed local weights. When all judgments for all nodes were completed, AHP combined the eigenvectors across the different levels of the hierarchy to produce global weights that sum to the value of one at teach level of the hierarchy, rather than at each node (Moutinho, Rita, and Curry 1996).. 25.

(32) Results This section presents the results of the collected data from the survey. It is divided into two parts, one for the demand side data and one for the supply side data.. The Demand Side: Japanese Tourists Demographic data. The following demographic data were collected. Most participants were between 20 and 40 years old (Figure 4.1). The mean age was 28.6 years old.. 26.

(33) Most participants were female, and the ratio was 52 female versus 16 males (Figure 4.2).. 27.

(34) Both students and working people participated in the study, with a frequency of 31 students and 37 working persons (Figure 4.3).. 28.

(35) Most of the participants described themselves as independent travelers (67.6%), in contrast to travelling with a group tour (17.6%). 14.7% of the participants identified themselves as both independent and group tour travelers (Figure 4.4).. Competing destinations. In the online survey, participants were first asked to name, supposing they were considering travel to Sweden, two countries that they considered to be its closest competing destinations. Results (Table 4.1) showed that a major part of the participants considered the three other Scandinavian countries (Norway, Finland and Denmark) to be Sweden’s closest competing destinations, followed by Switzerland, a couple of West European countries (England, France, Germany and Holland) as well as the United States and Iceland.. 29.

(36) Table. 4.1. Frequency of competitors (demand side). COUNTRY. FREQUENCY. Norway. 34. Finland. 33. Denmark. 20. Switzerland. 6. England. 4. France. 4. Germany. 4. Holland. 4. Iceland. 4. USA. 4. Italy. 3. Canada. 2. Greece. 2. Australia. 1. Belgium. 1. (Europe). 1. India. 1. Poland. 1. Portugal. 1. Russia. 1. Singapore. 1. South Korea. 1. Spain. 1. Thailand. 1. Turkey. 1. Total. 136. The participants were then asked to rank the above mentioned two competing destinations and Sweden, according to where they would like to travel the most. To get. 30.

(37) a clearer view of the attractiveness of each of these destinations to the Japanese participants, a certain score were given every time a country was being ranked in a certain position. -. 1st place ranking = 3 points. -. 2nd place ranking = 2 points. -. 3rd place ranking = 1 point. The summation of these scores was then divided with the number of times they had been ranked, to get a mean score of attractiveness for each destination. Table. 4.2. Attractiveness of competitors COUNTRY. N. Sum. Mean. 1. Finland. 32. 68. 2.13. 2. Sweden. 66. 136. 2.06. 3. Denmark. 20. 36. 1.80. 4. Norway. 32. 56. 1.75. Results (Table 4.2) indicate that Finland seem to have been ranked fairly high among the different competing destinations. Even though Norway was one of the most frequently mentioned countries, it seemed that participants ranked it lower when they had to choose between where they wanted to go the most. The possible reasons for Finland’s tendency to get relatively favorable rankings, and what implications it might have for Sweden, will be discussed in the discussion chapter. AHP factor weights. The participants were then asked to rank the four main factors, Natural Resources, Cultural Resources, Tourism Infrastructure and Range of Activities, according to their importance if they were considering the above mentioned three countries as potential travel destinations. The ranking was conducted to facilitate for the participants to get a more consistent rating of the factors in the following question. In the next question participants were asked to rate all the main factors and sub factors. 31.

(38) according to their importance if they were considering the above three countries as their potential travel destinations. The results (Table 4.3) showed that of the four main factors Natural Resources were regarded as the most important, with Cultural Resources on the second place, Tourism Infrastructure on the third place, and Range of Activities regarded as the least important of the main factors. Within each main factor, the sub factors that displayed the highest local importance weights were Natural Scenery, Climate, History, Accommodation and Adventure Activities. Wildlife seemed to be the least important of the sub factors. Table 4.3 AHP factor weights demand side. Local. Global. Attribute. M. SE. SD. M. SE. SD. Natural Resources. 0.4177. 0.0259. 0.0275. 0.4177. 0.0259. 0.0275. Natural Scenery. 0.3802. 0.0240. 0.1924. 0.1588. 0.0240. 0.0803. Climate. 0.4624. 0.0279. 0.2235. 0.1931. 0.0116. 0.0933. Wildlife. 0.1573. 0.0143. 0.1144. 0.0657. 0.0059. 0.0478. 0.2714. 0.0205. 0.1642. 0.2714. 0.0205. 0.1642. History. 0.3800. 0.0299. 0.2396. 0.1031. 0.0081. 0.0650. Cultural Arts. 0.3202. 0.0217. 0.1739. 0.0869. 0.0058. 0.1739. Cuisine. 0.2997. 0.0271. 0.2168. 0.0813. 0.0073. 0.0588. 0.1831. 0.0148. 0.1189. 0.1831. 0.0148. 0.1189. Accommodation. 0.4547. 0.0288. 0.2311. 0.0832. 0.0052. 0.0423. Transportation. 0.3309. 0.0225. 0.1805. 0.0606. 0.0041. 0.0330. Service. 0.2143. 0.0195. 0.1560. 0.0392. 0.0035. 0.0285. 0.1277. 0.0141. 0.1133. 0.1277. 0.0141. 0.1133. Adventure Activities. 0.4276. 0.0306. 0.2453. 0.0546. 0.0039. 0.0313. Cultural Activities. 0.3014. 0.0231. 0.1850. 0.0385. 0.0029. 0.0236. Recreational Activities. 0.2709. 0.0240. 0.1921. 0.0346. 0.0030. 0.0245. Cultural Resources. Tourism Infrastructure. Range of Activities. 32.

(39) However, we must also look at the CI and CR numbers that indicate the grade of consistency in participants’ answers. Results (Table 4.4) showed that the mean CI and CR values for all main factors and sub factors were larger than 0.1, which means that the inconsistency in the answers from participants were too high. A CR of 0.1 or below is considered acceptable, and any higher values indicate that judgments need reexamination (Crouch 2010). Table 4.4 Factor CI and CR numbers Mean. Mean. Attributes. CI. CR. Main Factors. 0.2348. 0.263. Natural Resources. 0.187. 0.3633. Cultural Resources. 0.117. 0.228. Tourism Infrastructure. 0.12. 0.233. Range of Activities. 0.156. 0.303. Since not all of the participants answered in an inconsistent way, the next step was to remove all the inconsistent participants, e.g. participants with a CR higher than 0.1, from the data and run the factor weight analysis again to see if there was a different outcome of the factor weights. The participants were reduced to 30 persons.. 33.

(40) Table 4.5 AHP factor weights demand side. Local. Global. Attribute. M. SE. SD. M. SE. SD. Natural Resources. 0.3832. 0.0548. 0.2263. 0.3832. 0.0548. 0.2263. Natural Scenery. 0.3420. 0.0354. 0.1461. 0.1104. 0.0178. 0.0178. Climate. 0.5219. 0.0386. 0.1595. 0.1685. 0.0815. 0.0197. Wildlife. 0.1360. 0.0246. 0.1017. 0.0439. 0.0445. 0.0281. 0.2208. 0.0346. 0.1426. 0.2208. 0.0346. 0.1426. History. 0.3028. 0.0368. 0.2017. 0.0759. 0.0122. 0.0503. Cultural Arts. 0.3156. 0.0271. 0.1484. 0.0869. 0.0104. 0.0430. Cuisine. 0.3815. 0.0405. 0.2222. 0.0956. 0.0117. 0.0483. 0.2106. 0.0308. 0.1271. 0.2106. 0.0308. 0.1271. Accommodation. 0.4094. 0.0365. 0.1899. 0.0685. 0.0128. 0.0531. Transportation. 0.3413. 0.0291. 0.1512. 0.0571. 0.0121. 0.0499. Service. 0.2492. 0.0284. 0.1480. 0.0416. 0.0075. 0.0309. 0.1853. 0.0363. 0.1499. 0.1853. 0.0363. 0.1499. Adventure Activities. 0.4085. 0.0374. 0.1908. 0.0681. 0.0106. 0.0440. Cultural Activities. 0.2954. 0.0294. 0.1499. 0.0492. 0.0471. 0.0360. Recreational Activities. 0.2959. 0.0335. 0.1709. 0.0493. 0.0089. 0.0368. Cultural Resources. Tourism Infrastructure. Range of Activities. 34.

(41) Table 4.6 Factor CI and CR numbers Mean. Mean. CI. CR. Main Factors. 0.0265. 0.029. Natural Resources. 0.007. 0.0132. Cultural Resources. 0.008. 0.015. Tourism Infrastructure. 0.005. 0.01. Range of Activities. 0.0067. 0.013. Attributes. Results (Table 4.5) showed that most of the factor weights had similar importance weights as before. However, there were some differences. Among the main factors, Natural Resources stood out as the most important one again, with Range of Activities as the least important. Among the sub factors, Climate, Accommodation and Adventure Activities were once again among the most important factors. However, this time Cuisine stood out as more important than both History and Cultural Arts. The Service factor was among the weakest factors. Pairwise mean comparison of factor importance rankings. Since some of the AHP analyses had trouble with the consistency ratings, pairwise mean comparisons of the ranking of factors were also conducted for all the main factors and sub factors using SPSS. The lower the mean, the higher was the importance ranking. Table 4.8 Paired main factors t. Pair 1: Natural Resources – Cultural Resources 0.48. df. Sig.. 67. 0.678. Pair 2: Natural Resources – Tourism Infra. -0.06. 67. 0.951. Pair 3: Natural Resources – Activities. -3.26. 67. 0.002. Pair 4: Cultural Resources – Tourism Infra. -0.51. 67. 0.610. Pair 5: Cultural Resources - Activities. -3,72. 67. 0.000. Pair 6: Tourism Infra – Activities. -3.74. 67. 0.000. 35.

(42) Table 4.9 Paired main factors Mean. N. SD. SE Mean. Pair 3: Natural Resources. 2.34. 68. 1.180. 0.143. Activities. 3.06. 68. 1.035. 0.126. 2.25. 68. 1.042. 0.126. 3.06. 68. 1.035. 0.126. 2.35. 68. 1.048. 0.127. 3.06. 68. 1.035. 0.126. Pair 5: Cultural Resources Activities Pair 6: Tourism Infrastructure Activities. Results (Table 4.9) showed that Natural Resources was perceived as more important (M=2.34) than Range of Activities (M=3.06; t(67)=-3.267, p = 0.002). Cultural Resources was perceived as more important (M=2.25) than Range of Activities (M=3.06; t(67)=-3.727, p = 0.000). Tourism Infrastructure was perceived as more important (M=2.35) than Range of Activities (M=3.06; t(67)=-3.742. Only these three pairs were significantly different (Table 4.8). Table 4.10 Paired Sub Factors: Natural Resources t. df. Sig.. Pair 1: Natural Scenery - Climate. -7.600. 61. 0.000. Pair 2: Natural Resources – Wildlife. -16.113. 61. 0.000. Pair 3: Climate - Wildlife. -4.547. 61. 0.000. 36.

(43) Table 4.11 Paired Sub Factors: Natural Resources Mean. N. SD. SE Mean. Pair 1: Natural Scenery. 1.194. 62. 0.4375. 0.0556. Climate. 2.097. 62. 0.6196. 0.0787. Pair 2: Natural Scenery. 1.194. 62. 0.4375. 0.0556. Wildlife. 2.710. 62. 0.5244. 0.0666. Pair 3: Climate. 2.097. 62. 0.6196. 0.0787. Wildlife. 2.710. 62. 0.5244. 0.0666. Results (Table 4.11) showed that Natural Scenery was perceived as more important (M=1.194) than Climate (M=2.097; t(61)=-7.600, p = 0.000). Natural Scenery was also perceived as more important (M=1.194) than Wildlife (M=2.710; t(61)=-7.600, p = 0.000). Climate was perceived as more important (M=2.097) than Wildlife (M=2.710; t(61)=-4.547, p = 0.000). All of the paired means were significantly different from each other (Table 4.10). Table 4.12 Paired Sub Factors: Cultural Resources t. df. Sig.. Pair 1: History – Cultural Arts. 2.368. 64. 0.021. Pair 2: History – Cuisine. 2.234. 64. 0.029. Pair 3: Cultural Arts - Cuisine. 0.266. 64. 0.791. 37.

(44) Table 4.13 Paired Sub Factors: Cultural Resources Mean. N. SD. SE Mean. 2.262. 65. 0.7960. 0.0987. 1.892. 65. 0.7315. 0.0907. Pair 2: History. 2.262. 65. 0.7960. 0.0987. Cuisine. 1.846. 65. 0.8702. 0.1079. Pair 1: History Cultural Arts. Results (Table 4.13) showed that Cultural Arts was perceived as more important (M=1.892) than History (M=2.262; t(64)=2.368, p = 0,021). Cuisine was perceived as more important (M=1.846) than History (M=2.262; t(64)=2.234, p = 0,029). Cultural Arts were perceived as no different (M=1.892) from Cuisine (M=1.846; t(64)=0.266, p = 0,791) (Table 4.12). Table 4.14 Paired Sub Factors: Tourism Infrastructure t. df. Sig.. Pair 1: Accommodation – Transportation -0.285. 66. 0.787. Pair 2: Accommodation – Service. -0.487. 66. 0.449. Pair 3: Transportation - Service. -0.534. 66. 0.318. Results showed that for the Tourism Infrastructure sub factors, none of the pair wise mean comparisons were significantly different from each other (Table 4.14).. 38.

(45) Table 4.15 Paired Sub Factors: Range of Activities t. df. Sig.. Pair 1: Adventure – Cultural. 1.590. 65. 0.117. Pair 2: Adventure – Recreational. -2.398. 65. 0.019. Pair 3: Cultural - Recreational. -3.817. 65. 0.000. Table 4.16 Paired Sub Factors: Range of Activities Mean. N. SD. SE Mean. Pair 2: Adventure Recreational Pair 3: Cultural Recreational. 1.955. 66. 0.7531. 0.0927. 2.348. 66. 0.7941. 0.0977. 1.697. 66. 0.7839. 0.0965. 2.348. 66. 0.7941. 0.0977. Results (Table 4.16) showed that Adventure Activities was perceived as more important (M=1.955) than Recreational Activities (M=2.348; t(65)=-2.398, p = 0,019). Cultural Activities was perceived as more important (M=1.697) than Recreational Activities (M=2.348; t(65)=-3.817, p = 0,000). Adventure Activities were perceived as no different (M=1.955) from Cultural Activities (M=1.697; t(65)=1.590, p = 0,117) (Table 4.16).. The Supply Side: Tourism Experts’ Opinions Competing destinations. In the online survey, four Swedish tourism experts were first asked to name two countries that they considered to be the closest competing destinations to Sweden. Results (Table 4.17) showed that some of the experts considered two other Scandinavian countries (Norway and Denmark) to be Sweden’s. 39.

(46) closest competing destinations. Other competing destinations mentioned were Canada, New Zealand, Iceland, Switzerland and Czech Republic. Table. 4.17. Frequency of competitors (supply side). COUNTRY. FREQUENCY. Norway. 3. Denmark. 2. Canada. 1. New Zealand. 1. Iceland. 1. Switzerland. 1. Czech Republic. 1. The experts were then asked to rank the above mentioned two competing destinations and Sweden, according to their overall competitiveness as international tourism destinations. An interesting result was that when Sweden was compared with its Nordic neighbors, Norway and Denmark was always being ranked higher than Sweden as a competitive international tourism destination. AHP factor weights. The tourism experts were then asked to rank the four main factors, Natural Resources, Cultural Resources, Tourism Infrastructure and Range of Activities, according to Sweden’s competitive strength as a tourist destination on that particular factor. The ranking was conducted to facilitate for the participants to get a more consistent rating of the factors in the next question. In the next question the tourism experts were asked to rate all the main factors and sub factors according to their importance according to Sweden’s competitive strength as a tourist destination on that particular factor. The rating was conducted pair wise in order with the theory of AHP.. 40.

(47) Table 4.18 AHP factor weights supply side. Local. Global. Attribute. M. SE. SD. M. SE. SD. Natural Resources. 0.5624. 0.0481. 0.0962. 0.5624. 0.0481. 0.0962. Natural Scenery. 0.6152. 0.0554. 0.1108. 0.3460. 0.0311. 0.0623. Climate. 0.1975. 0.0518. 0.1037. 0.1110. 0.0291. 0.0583. Wildlife. 0.1871. 0.0456. 0.0912. 0.1052. 0.0256. 0.0513. 0.2007. 0.0148. 0.0296. 0.2007. 0.0148. 0.0296. History. 0.4442. 0.1310. 0.2620. 0.0891. 0.0262. 0.2620. Cultural Arts. 0.3051. 0.0529. 0.1059. 0.0612. 0.0106. 0.1059. Cuisine. 0.2506. 0.1154. 0.2309. 0.0502. 0.0231. 0.0463. 0.0724. 0.0104. 0.0208. 0.0724. 0.0104. 0.0208. Accommodation. 0.4612. 0.1032. 0.2065. 0.0334. 0.0074. 0.0149. Transportation. 0.1601. 0.0552. 0.1105. 0.0116. 0.0040. 0.0080. Service. 0.3785. 0.1298. 0.2597. 0.0274. 0.0094. 0.0188. 0.1643. 0.0490. 0.0981. 0.1643. 0.0490. 0.0981. Adventure Activities. 0.4964. 0.1275. 0.2551. 0.0816. 0.0209. 0.0419. Cultural Activities. 0.3143. 0.0316. 0.0633. 0.0516. 0.0052. 0.0104. Recreational Activities. 0.1891. 0.0972. 0.1945. 0.0310. 0.0159. 0.0319. Cultural Resources. Tourism Infrastructure. Range of Activities. 41.

(48) Table. 4.19. Factor CI and CR numbers. Mean. Mean. CI. CR. Main Factors. 0.0801. 0.09. Natural Resources. 0.0879. 0.1708. Cultural Resources. 0.1252. 0.2431. Tourism Infrastructure. 0.088. 0.17. Range of Activities. 0.0423. 0.0822. Attributes. The results (Table 4.18) shows that of the four main factors Natural Resources is by far regarded as the strongest, with Cultural Resources on the second place, and Tourism Infrastructure and Range of Activities having very low numbers. Within each main factor, the sub factors that display the highest local strength weights are Natural Scenery, History, Accommodation and Adventure Activities. Wildlife, Transportation and Recreational Activities had the weakest factors. However, these results also showed fairly high CI and CR numbers (Table 4.19) on some of the sub factors. To get rid of the inconsistency in the answers on these factors, participants with a CI higher than 0.1 was removed from the data and the AHP analysis was run again on the Natural Resources sub factors.. 42.

(49) Table. 4.20. AHP factor weights supply side. Local. Global. Attribute. M. SE. SD. M. SE. SD. Natural Resources. 0.5624. 0.0481. 0.0962. 0.5624. 0.0481. 0.0962. Natural Scenery. 0.6918. 0.0224. 0.0317. 0.4166. 0.0135. 0.0191. Climate. 0.1927. 0.0498. 0.0705. 0.1160. 0.0300. 0.0424. Wildlife. 0.1154. 0.0274. 0.0388. 0.0694. 0.0165. 0.0233. 0.2007. 0.0148. 0.0296. 0.2007. 0.0148. 0.0296. History. 0.4442. 0.1310. 0.2620. 0.0891. 0.1310. 0.2620. Cultural Arts. 0.3051. 0.0529. 0.1059. 0.0612. 0.0106. 0.0212. Cuisine. 0.2506. 0.1154. 0.2309. 0.0502. 0.0231. 0.0463. 0.0724. 0.0104. 0.0208. 0.0724. 0.0104. 0.0208. Accommodation. 0.4612. 0.1032. 0.2065. 0.0334. 0.0074. 0.0149. Transportation. 0.1601. 0.0552. 0.1105. 0.0116. 0.0040. 0.0080. Service. 0.3785. 0.1298. 0.2597. 0.0274. 0.0094. 0.0188. 0.1643. 0.0490. 0.0981. 0.1643. 0.0490. 0.0981. Adventure Activities. 0.4964. 0.1275. 0.2551. 0.0816. 0.0209. 0.0419. Cultural Activities. 0.3143. 0.0316. 0.0633. 0.0516. 0.0052. 0.0104. Recreational Activities. 0.1891. 0.0972. 0.1945. 0.0310. 0.0159. 0.0319. Cultural Resources. Tourism Infrastructure. Range of Activities. 43.

(50) Table. 4.21. Factor CI and CR numbers. Mean. Mean. Attributes. CI. CR. Main Factors. 0.0801. 0.09. Natural Resources. 0.0017. 0.0034. Cultural Resources. 0.1252. 0.2431. Tourism Infrastructure. 0.088. 0.17. Range of Activities. 0.0423. 0.0822. The weights were not radically changed (Table 4.20). Natural Scenery was still the strongest factor, and then Climate and Wildlife. However, Cultural Resources and Tourism infrastructure sub factors could not be reduced with more participants since all four experts would be removed then. Disregarding the Cultural and Tourism Infrastructure sub factors, we can still see that experts believe that Sweden is strong in Natural Resources, especially Natural Scenery. We also see that they believe Sweden to be competitively strong when it comes to Adventure Activities.. 44.

(51) General Discussion This section presents an analysis and discussion of the results from this study and their implications, as well as research limitations and suggestions for future research in the area.. Discussion and Implications The purpose of this study was to find answers to the following three questions: -. What are the determinant factors when Japanese tourists consider Sweden as their travel destination?. -. Is there a fit between those determinant factors and factors where the Swedish tourism industry is competitively strong?. -. How should Sweden as a destination be marketed and positioned to the Japanese market in order to increase Japanese tourists?. The field of interest for this thesis was to apply destination competitiveness factors invented by earlier researchers in the area on particular segments of the tourism market, in this case the marketing of Sweden to the Japanese tourism market. Research question 1: determinant factors -. What are the determinant factors when Japanese tourists consider Sweden as their travel destination?. The relatively large importance of natural resources shows that the Japanese tourists considers Sweden a destination you go to for its natural beauty, rather than its cultural resources, like history and cultural arts. This is not extremely surprising, since Sweden is a big country with a small population, leaving large areas free from human habitation and lets animals roam free in forests and mountains. However, Sweden also has a long and rich history, which could be regarded as an attractive reason to visit the country for some people. Our sample, consisting mainly of young Japanese adults in their 20’s and 30’s, seem to be relatively uninterested in the. 45.